Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES-2008-084 Comprehensive Plan Update Phase IIA RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~~~ ~~'.°2~~? • ~ Q WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners desires to update its Comprehensive Plan for the future development and preservation of Orange County; WHEREAS, the Board authorized a timetable and process for the development of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, the Commissioners established a team of County advisory boards, staff, and consultants to prepare the Plan, held public hearings and information meetings to hear citizen comments, and conducted work sessions on a draft Comprehensive Plan; WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its October 1, 2008 meeting unanimously recommended adoption of the draft Comprehensive Plan to include its proposed revisions that have been conveyed to the Board of County Commissioners; WHEREAS, the Board reviewed the draft Comprehensive Plan, public comments received during the public hearing process, and the Planning Board's proposed revisions; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Orange County Board of County Commissioners that the Board hereby adopts the 2030 Comprehensive Plan as contained in the May 6, 2008 draft, with revisions as reflected in Attachments 1 and 2, "Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions" and "Table of BOCC Additional • Revisions", respectively, and with additional revisions made by the Board of County Commissioners at the November 18, 2008 meeting (Attachment 3); and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County staff will work to ensure that the revisions, as adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, are accurately reflected in the Comprehensive Plan document prior to printing copies, and that any errors found in the future will be brought forward. promptly to the Commissioners and corrected. Upo motion of Commissioner ~~~i,_~, seconded by Commissioner the foregoing 'resolution was adopted this the _~_ day of ~~~/~tll~a~-L~ 2008 I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on November 18, 2008, as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this ~_ day of /~/`~~~-rte ~ 2008. =; ~t~rt.~ c t'C o,~~rP . ~I,i:~'7~xy _ ,,, ,~ .~~;;; Clerk to the Board of Commissioners • ~ bC This page is intentionally left blank. May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~. a ~ w PB Proposed Revision a w ~ ~ ;~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) a~ m .~ ~ ~ ocav~~ a~ ~ ~ ~ cV o o~ d E ;3 a~ a ~ ~ '~O~ Oma ao om - Chapter-1: Plan.-Overview. 1) 1-6 1st P. Delete and replace with Attachment 1.3. .PB 9/3/2008 Existing public policies, including the policies provided in the 1981 Orange 2) 1-10 2nd P. County Land Use Element See Appendix ), will remain in effect... [Add Staff 7/9/2008 Complete set of 1981 policies to the Appendix and label here] Add the following Although the scope of the Comprehensive Plan is intended to guide the development and growth in the unincorporated area of Orange County many data variables are only available for the County as a 3) 1-2 3rd pt. whole Unless otherwise indicated tables and charts for county-level data Public 7/9/2008 will pertain to both the incorporated and unincorporated areas. Population values for the extra-territorial jurisdictions will not be included within city or town totals but rather within the unincorporated County totals. 4) 1-5 2nd P. The complete process is provided in Appendix C: 2030 Staff 7/9/2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Process and Schedule. [Add to Appendix] High residential densities near 5) 1-7 Last P. transit corridors and along major thoroughfares may encourage more public Staff/PB 7/9/2008 transportation use by County residents. Chapter 3: '~~-Economic' Development Element ~. P r s ~"' 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 1 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~- J C ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ •~ . (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ ° o . ~ ~ ~ ~ c~j ci ~ o~ .°~~ a° ~ Oma om Orange County's economic history is uniquely based in its natural and agricultural resources, the establishment of one of the nations finest public 1) 3-1 19 universities and medical facilities within its borders, its proximity to the PB 7/9/2008 Research Triangle Park, Duke University, and the high quality of life valued b its residents. Insert Historically the shifting of Orange County's political boundaries have resulted in losses to its manufacturing base. Although difficult to quantify, the most significant loss may have occurred between the years 1849 and 2) 3-1 22 1881 when portions of Orange County were taken to create Alamance and BOCC 8/6/2008 Durham Counties Changes to Orange County's boundaries also occurred in 1771 when Guilford Wake, and Chatham Counties were formed and again in 1777 with the formation of Caswell County. . 3 3-1 Last P. Delete 2nd sentence. BOCC 9/3/2008 4 3-5 19 "Metro olitan Areas" should not be ca italized. Staff 9/10/2008 Previous economic development studies have ~iefled-ir+_e~ identified several gOCC 7/9/2008 5) 3-6 65 key economic development issues... 6) 3-7 10 Under Key Issues add bullet: * Providing employment opportunities for the gOCC 7/9/2008 underemployed unemployed and the aging workforce. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 2 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) •«. Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision J c w ~ c (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) N ~ nm a ~ ~ ~ . c~j ci c-o d ~ ~ ~ Oma Dm +' a ~ In FY 2006, Orange County experienced $7.440 in ~ 7) 3-10 48 sa~ita retail sales per capita +~• BOCC 9/10/2008 8 3-10 Fi 3-8 Delete Person Count from table. BOCC 7/9/2008 Looking at 2002 Census of Agriculture data, Orange County had fewer 9) 3-11 8 farms than most other counties in the Q° °"rnh Tri~n„I° region (Alamance, Staff 7/9/2008 Chatham Durham and Wake Counties). "...largely due to the wages earned from employers located in the Research PB 7/9/2008 10) 3-13 47 Triangle Park and Duke University. Insert: Orange County is distinctive in that a substantial proportion of its citizens work in the Research Triangle Durham and Duke University but prefer to live in the Countv because of the high quality of life. These PB 9/3/2008 11) 3-16 14 residents typically earn above average incomes and make below average demands on public services Public policies designed to increase lobs within Orange Countv should not reduce this appeal to commuters. 12) 3-16 21 What's in store for the next a~20 years? Staff 7/9/2008 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 3 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) PB Proposed Revision m ° w ~~ ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ ap" ~ ~ ~ # ocam ° ~ ~ a~ ~ ~U ~ o~ `± a -c v~ U m ' o a O om Add the following: Tourism is another significant component of Orange County's economy. Accordina to the 2006 Economic Impact of Travel on North Carolina, a study conducted by the Travel Industry Association of America more than 1 710 'obs in Oran a Count were direct) attributable to 13) 3-16 35 travel and tourism. creating $27.62 million payroll This industry is BOCC 7/9/2008 continuing to flourish and increased 8 2 percent between 2004 and 2006 generating an economic impact of $127 6 million Tax revenues the count rL receives from travel and tourism represents an $85 tax saving for each resident of the County. Add;the fdllovv~ng';,additional objective;Obi~ctive ED 1.~8 Explore policies to'~ 14) 3-18 38 use in attracting and encouraging development of companies and- Public 8/6/2008 enterprises thattwill build~and~~tpand upori'the CciitV`s economic base . Objective ED-2.5: Identify lands suitable 15) 3-19 10 ia~ to accommodate the expansion and growth of commercial and Public 8/6/2008 industrial uses in the Count . Objective ED- 2.6: 16) 3-19 13-21 ed~ Identi areas that are desirable and attractive to major corporate users with access to public transportation networks and possibly gOCC 7/9/2008. rail. 11/18/08 All comments from. the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 4 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) ~- J C ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ c (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a N a ~ # ~ a~ ~ c V v ~~ V .o ° ~ +~ co E °3 °~ a _ Oma' oa . Objective ED-2.7: Select industrial sites in Economic Development Areas based on present and planned supporting gOCC 7/9/2008 17) 3-19 16-21 systems, such as public water and sewer tines, access to ade uate hi hwa Public 8/6/2008 rail or public transportation infrastructures, and t#e-a-ef minimize detrimental environmental or negative social impacts outcomes. Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted 18) 3-19 39 with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. Objective ED-3.3: Form partnerships with ^~ ~~"°^~ T°^" Durham Technical Community College UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools, Orange BOCC 7/9/2008 19) 3-20 5 County Schools, and others to provide adequate training and education to Public 8/6/2008 enable C~t~ workers in Orange County to obtain high quality jobs. Chapter'4: Housing Element ., s, ., Add the following to the first bullet point: ".....based paint improvements; 7/g/2008 1) 4-2 30 continuation of the County's Urgent Repair Program; constructing new rental BOCC 8/6/2008 housin ,• 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 5 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of ~BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,~ a c ~, PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ ;~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a °~ ~ ~ ~ c~j ci o-p c~ ~ ~U ~ ~ ++ ca '" a c ~ Oma Cm Add the following: The Affordable Housing Bond Program uses bond funds to create deferred and direct loans, which encourage homeownership. In 2001, Orange Countv voters approved a $4.0 million dollar Affordable Housing Bond referendum. A wide range of proiects are eligible for bond 2 fundin includin homeownershi and rental housin ro'ects as well as land ) 4-2 30 BOCC 7/9/2008 acquisition proiects. Mixed-tenant housing and production of non-traditional housing types -- such as duplexes and single room occupancy (SRO) units are also encouraged. Project proformas are reviewed to insure the financial feasibility of proposals and to recommend specific rates and terms to the Board of Countv Commissioners. Add as a bullet point: According to the U.S. Department of Housing and 3) 4-5 30-31 Urban Development, in FY 2008, the median income for families in Orange PB 9/10/2008 County was $62,100. In 2000, married families (which includes married couples without children1 had a median income of $59,874 ' 4) 4-5 31 e5. Male single-parent households had a median income of BOCC 9/10/2008 $32,634, and female single-parent households had a median family income of $24,705. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 6 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,r Q C ~ - PB Proposed Revision ~ -w ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) a N a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c V v .~ U o o ~ ++ c~ a; a J ~ . Oma om , "Because private e~iie-fiet~e manufactured housing parks ~n the County's Staff 7/9/2008 5) 4-13 5 municipal jurisdictions are being converted to other uses, .... Objective H-1.1: _ssist in the rehabilitation and development of affordable housing and promotion of community Public 8/6/2008 6) 4-14 15-19 development programs in the County using multiple strategies including implementation of the County-wide Housing and Community Development Consolidated Plan. Objective H-1.3: Increase the provision of housing assistance for households in need and see{d+aatisn- Public 8/6/2008 7) 4-14 25-28 coordinate with public and non-profit organizations responsible for providing community services and housing in the County. Add the`following .additi~~al obji/ctive Obiective?H-1':6 Promote innovative approaches to housing th`at'are' responsive'#o the rieeds~of orange County ~- Public 8/6/2008 8) 4-14 40 mairitain quality and human scale increase energy:efficiency,'and reduce , construction and maintenance costs. w Objective H-2.1: Accommodate the development of group homesi a~- foster care facilities transitional housing facilities and other housing types in Public 8/6/2008 9) 4-15 4.7 appropriate locations to provide increased opportunities for social interaction, a de-institutionalized lifest le, and sinful em to ment. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 7 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~ Q c ~ PB Proposed .Revision ° w ~ ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ ° a N a ° ' ~ ~ ~ ~ c~j v . o- p `' n ~ ~ U .o ++ c`a ' . ~ Oma om Objective H-2.2: 10) 4-15 9-10 Continue to address issues of €-~ 6chronic Public 8/6/2008 #homelessness in Orange CountLr. . Objective H-3.5: Review and consider the Environmental Protection 11) 4-15 35 Agency's (EPA) Energy Star and Water Sense standards for use as an BOCC 7/9/2008 +ntFisate integral part of the county's housing rehabilitation program. Objective H-4.1: Continue to ,permit HUD code- 12) 4-16 5-7 compliant manufactured housing as a sr+tisa~l form of affordable housing in Public 8/6/2008 the County, +ho C~~4o R~ ~iFr~inn (~~i-!~ 13) 4-16 10 Objective H-4.2: Expand assistance for~elderly households wfie that gOCC 9/10/2008 have difficulty affording their home property tax. Chapter--5: Land Use'Elemenfi. ~w.,.- .. 1) 5-1 48 Delete apostrophe. Staff 9/10/2008 2) 5-2 N/A Delete Figure 5-1. This Figure is to be moved to Section 1.3. PB 9/10/2008 3) 5-36 31 Land Use Goal 5: Life, health, and property safe from dal- hazards. BOCC 7/9/2008 Add bullet under Regulatory History: "1981: Oran a Coun became the first 4) 5-6 24 county in North Carolina to adopt watershed protection zoning." See also BOCC 7/9/2008 section 6.73. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 8 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Punning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC~have been noted where applicable) m ~ PB Proposed Revision °d w ~ ~ ; (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ ~ ` a ~ ~ ~ c~j ci y,,, o-o °~ ~ m ' a~ o ° a ~ a O m 5) 5-6 24.25 1981: Zoning Ordinance text and Zoning Atlas adopted for ~ew~s-e#- Staff 9/3/2008 Hillsborough, Chapel Hill, ate Eno and Bingham Townships. 6) 5-6 30 Add bullet: "1984: Zoning extended to Cheeks Township." BOCC 9/3/2008 7) 5-6 32 Add bullet under Regulatory History: "1987: Erosion Control and Stormwater " BOCC 7/9/2008 Ordinances.adopted. In response to the establishment of the Rural Buffer around Chapel Hill and Carrboro, Orange County initiated a process to identify ways to protect open 8) 5-11 43-45 space within the Rural Buffer BOCC 9/3/2008 ^~•~;~ with an appropriate balance between the rights of private property owners and the protection of the environment for the common good. Delete lines 19-21 and replace with: In 2006, the County and Town initiated the process for development of a Strategic Growth Plan, and Phase 1 of the Plan was completed in 2007. The Orange County Board of County 9) 5-12 19-21 Commissioners and the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners are now BOCC 9/3/2008 engaged in Phase 2, imp(ementinq the Plan by preparing a planning agreement that would accomplish recommendations identified during Phase I. Completion is targeted for the end of 2008. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 9 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~,.. Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ° ° (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ m c a a' i a N o. ° ~ ~ a~ ~ ° ~U v °~ ~ ~ vs U ° _ a Oma om Add: Phase 3, which includes a final written report and potential 10) 5-12 33 implementation measures, has been extended to follow the completion of BOCC 9/3/2008 the 2008 Comprehensive Plan update. 11) 5-12 39 "...through the implementation of this plan such as fe~v+si~ adding new artners to the Water and Sewer boundary Agreement, ..." BOCC 7/9/2008 Add the following: The Pantry Study was to ensure that subseauent developments were in accordance with municipal and County land use 12) 5 13 obiectives and 'included participation from the Town of Hillsborough The - plan established development standards for transition areas and additional BOCC 7/9/2008 protection for environmenfially sensitive areas This plan was approved by the BOCC in Jul~986. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 10 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~ a ~ v~ PB Proposed Revision a W ~ .c ; (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a N a ~ ~ ~ c ~ j ci ~. o -o ~ ~ ~ Oma Cm a ~ Add the following: 1991 Efland Area Stud .The ur ose of the 1991 Efland Area Study was to "examine the greater issues affecting the comprehensive Iona-range plans for the Efland area the location of non-residential development and the protection of the community's character." The study was created in response to the community's expressed interest in 13) 5-13 21-22 maintaining the community character of Efland and was completed with a BOCC 7/9/2008 great deal of citizen support The study included an informal citizen survey, a citizen-appointed Steering Committee and seven community meetings. The result of the study were recommendations that the "community as a whole felt were important to the future of Efland." This plan was approved by the County Commissioners in April 1991. Add the following directly from the 1981 Land Use Element: Reservoir. Land which contains a public water supply source or the necessary attributes for Staff 9/3/2008 14) 5-17 g placement of a water supply impoundment to supply an adequate quality of water for public purposes. 15) 5-23 Map Add numerical net increase or decrease in population for each township. Public 7/9/2008 If 4hi~ ,~,.,~ ±r,~o ;;? Since these data were drawn from the 2000 Census, there 16) 5-25 5 are even more Hispanic/Latino individuals who now call Orange County BOCC 7/9/2008 home. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 11 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,~ a ~ ~, PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ .,~ (Chapter.breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ ° a ~ ~ ~* o # c ~j ci 'v~ U = ~ ° -o a~ E °r ~ ma om • a ~ O Poverty Rate - In the year 2000, 14.1 % of Orange County residents, which 17) 5-30 37 includes college students, were considered to be in poverty compared to BOCC 9/1.0/2008 12.3% of the State of North Carolina. Add : "In addition private land owners have taken positive steps towards 18) 5-32 6 protecting environmental resources through the provision of conservation BOCC 7/9/2008 easements." 19) 5-32 23-24 In 2004, Orange County was declared part of anon-attainment area by... Staff 9/10/2008 20) 5-34 g Between 1999 and ~AA4 2006, over 9A9-1100 lots were developed as part " Public 9/3/2008 of the major..... 21) 5-34 11 and over4A9 600 lots were created as part of the minor subdivision Public 9/3/2008 process... 22) 5-34 13 Add the following text: "See Tables (Insert appropriate reference)" Public 9/3/2008 23) 5-34 14 Insert Minor, Major, and Exempt Subdivision Tables and Text (See Public 9/3/2008 Attachment 5.4) 24) 5-35 9 "These zoning changes should r°~ encourage meeting the objectives that " BOCC 7/9/2008 promote sustainability including:... 11/18/08. All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 12 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,~ a w ~ ~ PB Proposed Revision ~ a (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ o. ~ # c ~j v 0 -a ~ ~ ~ Oma om •-' f~ J The County needs to develey refine policies to encourage green building gOCC 9/10/2008 25) 5-35 1 g practices..... ...and/or creating incentives for private developers to use more 26) 5-35 23-24 environmentally friendly construction and demolition techniques. BOCC 9/10/2008 Deconstruction for the purpose of reuse is preferred over demolition. Objective LU-2.2: Continue to protect valuable resource land such as 27) 5-37 36-37 productive agricultural areas, managed forest area's, historic sites and Staff 9/10/2008 properties, and potential reservoir sites... Obiective LU-2.4: Evaluate the development potential in rural crossroad communities to identify whether current regulations permit +~appropriate 28) 5-38 3-8 development that is et~t~f in character with these communities, and whether BOCC 9/3/2008 potential development in these areas would require significant expansions or cause depletions of public services. Obiective LU- 2.6: Protect prime reservoir sites from adverse development gOCC 7/9/2008 29) 5-38 14 impacts and to ensure that regulations for these areas are appropriate. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 13 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m wa c ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ° ~ ~ v V U ~ ~ E a; rn ca ~ ° ~ s '~ O ~ ° ~ o , _ a ~ Oma om Obiective LU- 2.7: Oevelep Refine green building standards to guide the design, siting, construction, and management of publicly owned and 30) 5-38 16 managed buildings in a manner that conserves energy and /or uses non- gOCC 7/9/2008 polluting renewable energy sources. Explore the development of preen Public 8/6/2008 building standards for private development. 31) 5-39 20 Obiective LU-3.5: "Encourage energy and water use in an efficient manner BOCC 7/9/2008 by industries and encourage energy efficient industries to locate..." Objective LU-3.7: Ensure that new development patterns in non-residential 32) 5-39 30 nodes encourage a clustered, walkable development pattern and discourage Public 8/6/2008 stri develo ment. Add.the followingadditional objective:' Objective-l_U=3:'11: In response to';~; 33 5 39 development plan's at Carolina IJorth, including th~`possi6le~reloCation of--;. ) - 47 _ -.- .. 4 :~f .. << - ~. - - Public 9/10/2008 Horace V1/illiams=Air ort~-review'County:land use ordinancesJand amend~if: . ~:,.~ - needed to rotect the inter=ests of Gran e Count 's r~~ " 'denfs,`' ~ f <~ " - 34) 5-40 12 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. 35) 5-40 13 Add: "...County, water efficiency standards for new development, BOCC 9/3/2008 development..." 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 14 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) y- J C ~ PB Proposed Revision a W ~ .~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cU ~ ~«, ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Omo 0000 a ~ Objective LU-4.3: "Determine how private developments can best gOCC 9/10/2008 36) 5-40 17 accommodate or provide..." Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted 37) 5-40 39 with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. Add~the following additional objective Objective LU 6.5 Establish a "one- ~ Public 8/6/2008 38) 5-41 16 stop":.County central'permittinq office.°` f. ~Oblective LU-6.6 Evaluate `and' ' the following additional objective:. Add 39) 5-41 16 . .. consider the "Comrnurii Buildirt "recommendations of the Sha in Oran e PB 8/6/2008 Y-.t f . County's Feature's Task Force ~ "' _ ' { ' " Add,~the.follnwing additional objective';'' Ob~ective LU 6:7 `Add an irl'dex td the 40) 5-41 16 adapted `Comprehensive Plari a'nd dovelop `an executive surnrnary of its : ,, _ ` ' PB .9/3/2008 contents. r s Chapter 6:Natural and Cultural Systems E~emerit Elevations in Orange County range from a high of 867 Sha feet at the ELAB g/10/2008 1) 6-2 14 summit ... Staff 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 15 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~,.. Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ° ~ ~ ~ ' E ~' v~ ° ~ c~ V ~ ° L ~ ~ ' a -~ Omn . Gm The majority of these quality soils extend across the County in a diagonal pattern southwest to northeast as shown in the dark green areas on the 2) 6-4 General Soils Map (6-2). ~ ELAB 9/10/2008 Staff 3) 6-5 4-102 Replace Map 6-2: Orange County Geology with Orange County Soil Survey. ELAB g/10/2008 Staff 4) 6-6 11 -••Americans that settled along the area s rivers and streams. Although no written record of..." Staff 7/9/2008 5) 6-6 30 Move parenthesis to read, "Anglican (from Eastern North Carolina and ELAB Vir inia and En lish Quakers. Staff 9/10/2008 Add, "Orange County escaped the physical destruction of the Civil War but, 6) 6-7 2 like so much of the south, experience substantial financial loss as well as ELAB 9/10/2008 social upheaval." Staff 7) 6-7 4 E~.r^~J~eT~ Agricultural Production suffered from the absence ... ELAB g/10/2008 Staff 8) 6-7 7 Many emancipated blacks left rural Orange for opportunities elsewhere but ELAB others stayed, acquired property and prospered. Staff 4/1/2008 9) 6-7 27 Insert revised Cultural Resources Map and label it. See Attachment 6.2. ELAB (Map also included in Profile Element as Map D-15.) Staff 4/1/2008 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 16 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m 4.Q c m PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ ; (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ° ~ ~ ;vs U ~,- ° ~ °~' a c ~ ~O~ Oma ~o om Exchange first two sentences to read as follows: "All county residents enioy ELAB 10) 6-9 3-4 some gain from local farms. Farmland is an irreplaceable physical, cultural Staff 4/16/2008 and economic asset. ." 11) 6-11 Replace Figure 6-1 with attached chart so that "# of farms" reads with ELAB g/10/2008 numbers alon ri ht axis. Attachment 6.4.1. Staff Replace first sentence ".. . 12) 6-11 9-11 f.,r.,,~,,,,r! h „o r~enror.ce ,,.,or 4~me ..rrrin„I~, iro nr~n4in„oo +„ ho ~ .,:~~~ ,~„-~~a-„~. ...,,,..,~.,., ...~-.......,, ~~.....,.....~ .........._~_ -_ -_ _ ..__. ' .Agriculture remains a significant ELAB Staff 9/10/2008 component of Orange County's economy. 13) 6-14 Re-label - ~ Map 6-4: Orange County Voluntary Agricultural Districts ELAB Staff 9/10/2008 14) 6-18 31 In 2005 the General Assembly amended the-pregfam-Farmland Enabling ELAB 9/10/2008 qct to include an economic development component. Staff The Planning Department, Economic Development Commission, Cooperative Extension Service, Soil and Water Conservation District__ and 15) 6-19 9-13 the Environment and Resource Conservation Department ELAB g/10/2008 staffs have been. working together to Staff examine County regulations regarding farm related uses that are outdated or unnecessaril onerous. 11 /18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 17 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) PB Proposed Revision m ~Q ° w ~ c ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ° ~ ~ ~ ° ~ c~j v ' o-o E ~' as ° ~ v~ U ~ °~,' ~ ' a -~ Oma om 16) 6-21 17 The County should pursue afarmer-to-farmer transfer program that would ELAB exempt the setief bu rLer from the rollback if the property stays in farm use. Staff g/10/2008 Link Need #4 ("Local farmers need access to...") and its associated bullet 17) 6-22 7-12 ("The County should also...") to Need #3. Renumber remaining bullets ELAB g/10/2008 accordingly, i.e. bullet #5 becomes #4. Staff 18) 6-22 23 The County needs to teach the next generation about farming ELAB 9/10/2008 and encoura a some to ursue farmin as an occu ation. Staff 19) 6-23 21 Objective AG-1 Replace: ~°^^^y^~~° °n~ °I I~~n1-~ +ho Din h+ +n C~+rm e..+ VV~C {AI IV VM VI l it IV " ELAB g/10/2008 with, Recognize and support the right to farm." Staff Obiective AG-2: Pursue new measures (some of which may require special 20) 6-23 28 legislation) to make farming more profitable, such as additional programs for BOCC 7/9/2008 +^~,~eTiertax assistance. 21) 6-26 44 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions, Objective AE-11: Improve the energy efficiency of buildings through several action steps: 1) upgrade existing buildings, including County and school 22) 6-33 31-37 buildings; 2) educate planning and building inspection officials about the ELAB g/10/2008 technologies and techniques of energy efficient construction; and 3) Staff encourage the use of "LEED Gold" for equivalent) as a standard in new construction. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 18 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,~ a ~ ~, PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~~ c ;,~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a N a °~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Oma' 0000 a ~ A Cultural Resource is a site, building, landscape, or object significant. in ELAB g/10/2008 23) 6-35 5-6 history or prehistory, architecture, archaeology or culture. Public 24) 6-36 24 Add to subtitle. NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES Staff 9/10/2008 Change bullet points to letters A-D. "The criteria describe how properties are significant for their association with : ~ important events; B) persons; C) ELAB g/10/2008 25) 6-36 36-39 for their importance in design or construction or DLfor their potential to Staff provide information." 26) 6-36 45 Add footnote: See complete list of NR criteria in Appendix ~ ELAB Staff g/10/2008 Footnote 30 "A high-style 1850s house constructed with atwo-story porch ELAB g/10/2008 27) 6-37 ma loose si nificance if it is u dated ... " Staff 28) 6-41 86 Delete source reference. w~:;^°: n^^°:;c'.';: e: n~f~ Ero.»anf_ ELAB Staff g/10/2008 Delete the paragraph starting with, "Cultural resources may be listed in the ELAB g/10/2008 29) 6-42 15-28 National Register ... " It has been relocated to another section of Chapter. Staff Local .Landmark and local district property owners for contributing and non- 9/10/2008 30) 6-42 32 contributing buildings) wishing to make changes. Staff 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 19 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~- Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ ~ a ~ a ~ ~ ~ c ~j ci ~ o 'v *' ° °_ ~ U = m ' a~ a a O om 31) 6-42 35 Space missing between the words Commission and reviews: "the Historic ELAB 9/10/2008 Preservation Commission reviews ..." Staff 32) 6-43 16 Space missing between the words Commission and remains: "The Historic ELAB g/10/2008 Preservation Commission remains ..." Staff 33) 6-43 19 Add emphasis: The Local Landmark Program and the National Register of ELAB 9/10/2008 Historic Places are fwo entire/ distinct and se arate ro rams . Staff 34) 6-43 Add to Footnote 41: See Appendix for the Secretary of the Interior's ELAB g/10/2008 Standards for Rehabilitation.. Staff Insert line between paragraphs. Last sentence of first paragraph reads, " 35) 6-44 14 Today almost 1,600 farms are listed in the program including fifteen from ELAB 9/10/2008 Orange County." Start new paragraph with "Agriculture and preservation Staff work hand-in-hand ... " 36) 6-44 50 Begin sentence with: "Surve s are conducted b archaeolo ical consultants ELAB 9/10/2008 who meet federal standards and t prLically include:..." Staff 37) 6-45/46 Include the 3 paragraphs about scenic resources, See.Attachment 6.4.3.1. 9/10/2008 Staff 38) 6-45/47 Adjust map box so that entire legend is visible -MAP 6-6: ORANGE ELAB g/10/2008 COUNTY SCENIC ROADS MAP. Staff 39 6-48 11 The geaf up rpose of the QRT ELAB 9/10/2008 Staff 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 20 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) ~ J ° C ~ . PB Proposed Revision w ~ c (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ~ ~ tU v •~ V 0 ~ ~ *; a J Oma' om ELAB 40) 6-48 29 Preservation philosophies are continually s#~a~e evolvin Staff g/10/2008 LAB E g/10/2008 41) 6-48 46 Delete: • • • Staff ELAB Footnote 48: The Town of Hillsborough recently adopted such an g/10/2008 42) 6-48 ordinance. Staff Delete second half of paragraph beginning with, ' ELAB g/10/2008 43) 6-50 10-16 Staff Footnote 50, "Historic property owners should take advantage advaflse-of ELAB g/10/2008 44) 6-50 the information and su ort .. " Staff Likewise there are no restrictions associated with listing a property an in the ELAB g/10/2008 45) 6-51 4 National Register unless the owners wish to pursue rehabilitation tax credits. Staff Objective CR-9 "Explore ways to inform the public about archaeology, how ELAB 46) 6-53 32 archaeologists to conduct investigations and what they to do with the Staff 9/10/2008 findin s. Obiective CR-2: Establish stronger partnerships with fleig- preservation organizations for the dissemination of information on current ELAB g/10/2008 47) 6-53 2 topics and to provide hands-on training, such as "how to" publications, Public examples of design guidelines, technical briefs, etc. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 21 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m w a ~ ~, PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ ; (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ a ~ ~ ~ E ° ' rn ~ '~ O~ ~ o * ~ a :~ Oma om Objective CR-5: Promote existing programs that offer financial incentives for 48) 6-53 17 preservation purposes and pursue new programs to encourage the ELAB g/10/2008 purchase, preservation, maintenance or adaptive reuse of historic Public landscapes, and historic and soon to be historic structures. Add the following additional ob~ective:.:Objective CR 12 Provide.fora`us~r-~ ELAB 49) 6-54 6 friendly ~publi~input process~for sYst~matic acquisition~of and cohtributioriao''~ 9/10/2008 y..... ~ , ~_ ; 4 , Public ., . informatdri`about cultural ceso~trCes.: Add new sentence following, "...county land conservation program in North Carolina." The Lands Legacy program was the first focus of the new ELAB 50) 6-59 40 Environment and Resource Conservation Department, a department Staff 9/10/2008 established in 1998 to make environmental protection a separate function of Orange County government. "Through Lands Legacy..." 51) 6-62 38-39 ELAB g/10/2008 Staff 52) 6-63 Replace Map 6-8; Protected Lands in Orange County (2004) with updated ELAB g/10/2008 ma 2008. Staff Add reference to updated Map 6-8. "Many important natural resource lands ELAB 53) 6-64 17 remain completely unprotected." Map 6-8 illustrates the locations of Staff 9/10/2008 protected lands in Orange County. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 22 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) • m ~ J C ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ .,°-~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a N o . ~ ~ U ~- E a; o~ a ~ .° O ~ Oma m o om . ~ 54) 6-66 29-30 Renumber goals. Change "(-Gear-ae~}" to (Goals 7 and 8) Staff g/10/2008 Goal is misnumbered. Natural & Cultural Systems Goal 6 7: A balanced ELAB g/10/2008 55) 6-66 33 and health ... Staff Goal is misnumbered. Natural & Cultural Systems Goal ~ 8: Networks of ELAB 9/10/2008 56) 6-67 25 rotected ... Staff 57) 6-69 15 "...interactive natural system that reacts to human activity manifested in ELAB ff g/10/2008 reduced ~~~°",.~,-'~~and stream flow..." Sta 58) 6-70 9-24 Rewrite paragraphs per Attachment 6.4.5. ELAB Staff 9/10/2008 "The geological characteristics of Orange County, in which the ground water ELAB g/10/2008 59) 6-73 ~ 19 so~4ies resources reside..." Staff 60) 6-74 g Change reference to Hydrogeologic Map - nn°„~p^=Appendix Map D-10: ELAB ff g/10/2008 Oran a Count Geolo Sta 61) 6-79 2 Lower case:- "nitrogen" and "l~phosphorus" ELAB Staff g/10/2008 62) 6-77 29-33 Text changed by Clarion? Not recognized -confusing. See BOCC Table of ELAB St ff g/10/2008 . Revisions a 63) 6-81 "Figure 6-89: Recharge Rates By Watershed / Subbasin in Orange County" ELAB Staff g/10/2008 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 23 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,,- Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ ;~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a ~ ° a ~ ~ E ~ ° c~ ~ d c ~j ci 'vs U = ~ o -o ° a; - a° J 'LOS Oma ao om 64) 6-87 34 Objective WR-13 "Use the new Water Supply Study (WR-1 ~ and the State's ELAB g/10/2008 Neuse River Basin model ..." Staff r ~'~ ~' Chapt r ~: 'Parks and Recr~eation'Element .=°° 1 7-2 38 Delete '`in Oran a Count " Staff 9/10/2008 2) 7-5 N/A Under description of Little River Park, "Created in partnership with Durham Staff 9/10/2008 County and non-profit Groups, the 391-acre...." 3) 7-5 N/A Under description of Little River Park, references to "7-miles" should be Staff 9/10/2008 changed to "more than 7-miles". 4) 7-6 N/A Under description of Twin Creeks Park and Educational Campus, 1st Staff 9/10/2008 sentence, change "ss#eel campus" to "educational campus". 5) 7-7 N/A Under description of New Hope Creek Preserve -Hollow Rock Access Area, Staff 9/10/2008 after "Durham County" add "and Triangle Land Conservancy." 6) 7-7 N/A Under Park/Facility, West Ten Soccer Park (tea-naed} Staff 9/10/2008 7) 7-7 2 Delete "te". (No changed required as determined through BOCC review) Staff 9/10/2008 ':Chapter 8: Services and'Facilities Element 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 24 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,~. Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision ~ m .~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a °~ ~ a y ~ ~ ~ ~ c V v •~ V - ~«. o -~ d a Ei ~ ~ Oma omo ~ a ~ St ff 9/10/2008 1 8-1 16 Delete "Mana ement" a 2) 8-1 36 "...provide direct potable water and/or sanitary sewer..." Staff 9/10/2008 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted 3) 8-3 7-11 with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted 4) 8-8 46-47 with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. Insert the following: Orange County holds a 1-Million Gallon per Day (MGD) allocation of water held within Jordan Lake. The State of North Carolina has 5) 8-9 42 been assi ned the use of the entire water su I stora a in Jordan Lake and Staff 9/10/2008 can assign this storage to local government having a need for water supply stora e. BOCC 7/9/2008 6) 8-11 38 Delete Objective VW11-5. PB 9/3/2008 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted 7) 8-12 16 with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions: Objective EC-1: "Continue to use Best Management Practices (BMP's) Staff 9/10/2008 8) 8-17 18 for..." 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 25 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m a ° ~ ~, PB Proposed Revision w ~ _ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ ~ a y a ~ ~ ~ ~ c Cj ~_ ' ~ o 'v E 'j v~ a ~ ~ vs V ~ ' °~ ~ Oma Gm 9) 8-25 14 "... three munici al fire de artments: Cha el Hill, p P p Hillsborough and Staff 7/9/2008 Carrboro), ..." 10) 8-25 18 "...and two rescue squads, (Orange County Rescue Sauad (Hillsborough) Staff 7/9/2008 and South Orange Rescue Squad Carrboro)." 11) 8-31 32 Objective BPS-T-3: "...enforcement and emergency r~a+~ageme~- Staff 9/10/2008 services... 12) 8-31 37 Objective PS-T-4: "Maintain high levels of cooperation and sharing of Staff 9/10/2008 eauipment among all departments..." Objective PS-T-6: Manage the number of future wireless 13) 8-32 5-6 telecommunication facilities by identifying preferred locations capable of Public 8/6/2008 accommodating service Countywide. 14) 8-32 ~ 2 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. 15) 8-33 33-34 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. 16) 8-35 ~ 41 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 26 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m 4- Q c ~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~ .•°-, (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ N ° a o. ~ ~t ~ ~ c U ~ ~.. o 'n F °~ o~ _ ';` O ~ a o a ~ Oma om 9/3/2008 17) 8-36 27-44 Edit as provided in Attachment 8.4.6. Staff 9/10/2008 Add the following: Orange County, the school systems, and municipalities are collaborating on opportunities to identify and secure potential sites for future schools. The Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill, and Hillsborough along 8 18) 8-38 7 BOCC 7/9/200 with the City of Mebane have undertaken a specific effort to explore the prospects for school sites that are consistent with the new standards and that could potentially be "landbanked" for future use. Cha ter 9. raps ortation Element _.. 1) 9-1 thru See Att. Edit consistent with revisions as provided in Attachment 9.0. ELAB St ff 9/10/2008 g-7 a ...possible tools that could be used to h°'^~^'°^^°^+°~' implement the 2) 9-11 5-8 recommendations. The report also includes specific transportation goals, E 9/10/2008 objectives, and policies for joint transportation planning a~-~e+~- Staff The intent... 3) 9-13 21-22 The plan to develop a bypass to relieve traffic +e through Hillsborough's ELAB 9/10/2008 historic downtown Jd+llsbsre~gh will continue to... Staff 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 27 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ,~ a = ~, PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ N ~ a a ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~j ci • o -p ' vs ~ c ~ U ~ m ~ ~ +~ ca a ~ a O om . Along standing position of Orange County has been that new roads and the significant widening of existing roads does little to improve the transportation system. Orange ELAB 4) 9-20 7-10 9/10/2008 County has traditionally directed its resources to improve alternatives to the Staff single passenger motorized vehicle as the primary means of transportation. The focus has been on public transportation, improving traffic flow, alleviating congestion at busy intersections, improving safety for cyclists and those who choose to walk. 5) 9-20 11-12 Planning Board recommendation not accepted by BOCC or accepted with additional revisions. See BOCC Table of Revisions. ..., these pollution emissions need to be reduced. The challen a for Oran e County is to: 6) 9-20 18 1. Reduce the projected increase in vehicle miles traveled. 9/10/2008 2. Increase mass transit rider ship Staff 3. Reduce the use of fossil fuels The County ~° ~^ ^°°~' ^f needs a comprehensive transportation plan that 7) 9-20 19-20 identifies long-term, coordinated goals for planning the County's 9/10/2008 transportation system of roads, bikeways, ... Staff 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 28 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) ~«- '~ = v~ PB Proposed Revision ° w ~ ~~ ;~ (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ a N o °' . ~ ;w U ~ ° F ;~ ~ a °~ ~ ~O~ Oma ~o Dm ...Orange County Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The comprehensive transportation plan should address deficiencies in the existing transportation 8) 9-20 36 ystem to provide needed improvements to: FLAB 9/10/2008 1. Increase safety for cyclists and pedestrians. Staff 2. Link bicycle lanes. 3. Link foot trails. 9) 9-20 43 ...areas specific plans into the... E~`B Staff 9/10/2008 Delete and replace with the following bullet point: Counties have few resources to construct bicycle facilities. Orange County needs strategies to 10) 9-20 46-49 fund implementation of the 1999 Bicycie Transportation Plan. The County St ff 9/10/2008 a should identi fundin sources to make im rovements to desi Hated bic cle routes and to increase safety for bicyclists throughout the County. Insert additional bullet to include: "2008 Regional Transit Vision Plan: pg 9/10/2008 11) 9.25 29 Recommendations for-North Carolina's Research Triangle Region" 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 29 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) m ~ m ' PB Proposed Revision ° ~ ~ ;c (Chapter breaks and new objectives are shaded) ~ m ~ ~ ~ y,~ ~ a ~n a °' I ~ 1F ~ yi TF a~ w c Cj ~ •m V ~..r o 'v ~ n. -' Oma om •A endives :. , ::; 1) B1-1 Map Map B1.1 Orange County and Surrounding Areas -revise to include Harnett B1-1 Count on map. gOCC 9/3/2008 2) B2-2 N/A Under "Highlights", 2nd column, delete. the 2nd bullet, which begins with "Hispanic/Latino community...." pg 8/6/2008 3) B2-3 B2b Table: B2b Add Native American %'s to County and Municipal Population by Race /Ethnicity (See Attachment B2b) PB 9/3/2008 4) B4-3 B4-b Add footnote under table Bob) Regional Income Comparisons: 1. Poverty fgures include college students. gOCC 9/10/2008 5) N/A N/A Add additional Appendix as provided in Attachment K and referenced in ELAB Item #26, Chapter 6 of this Table. Staff g/10/2008 6) N/A N/A Add additional Appendix as provided in Attachment L and referenced in ELAB Item #34, Chapter 6 of this Table. Staff g/10/2008 11/18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 30 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOGC have been noted where applicable) -. • • • • o~ C `gy J ~ • p W ~ ~ ~ PB Proposed Revision ~ m" N m ~ a o. C ~ ~ c U v ~ O E a; c~ a a ~ . Oma o , ocumen s s ou a prm a on recyc a paper an a so no a on e BOCC 7/9/2008 1) Cover cover. 2) Multiple instances When sentences begin with a number, it should be written out. BOCC 7/9/2008 3) Multiple ~ instances Change "Durham Tech" to "Durham Technical College" BOCC 7/9/2008 Multiple 4) instances Change "Mobile Home Park" to "Manufactured Housing District" BOCC 7/9/2008 Multiple 5) instances Change all references of "Parks and Recreation" to "Recreation and Parks" BOCC 7/9/2008 Multiple 6) instances Reference each goal/objective with its respective BOCC principle. BOCC 7/9/2008 Multiple Ensure consistency between documents as revisions are made to the draft 7) instances text that may also be included within the Appendices. Staff 7/9/2008 Multiple Revise each Element's "Links to Other Elements" section to be consistent 8) instances with adopted revisions to each Element's "Objectives" section. Staff 8/6/2008 9) Multiple instances Delete the timeframe references that are included with each objective. PB/BOCC 7/9/2008 Multiple 10) instances . Use "more than" rather than "over". BOCC 9/10/2008 11 /1 A/nR All rnmments from the Mav and Auctust Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process. 31 of 32 May 6, 2008 Draft Comprehensive Plan Table of BOCC Accepted Planning Board Revisions (Line items revised by the BOCC have been noted where applicable) ~ m ~ o w i a ,~, a PB Proposed Revision ~ m ~ m ~-~ yam a ~ E a~iv o~ a cUci 'v~ V ~ ~ a a; a ~ Oma' , o Multiple . 11) instances Verify and correct linked objectives between/among Elements Staff 9/10/2008 Multiple 12) .instances Use "less than" rather than "under". BOCC 9/10/2008 11 /18/08 All comments from the May and August Public Hearings were considered by the Planning Board during its review process 32 of 32 Attachment 1.3 An emerging point of consensus in Orange County is that we need to move toward becoming a sustainable community. What that means is that we must seek to develop a community that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Trends identified by scientists have demonstrated the need to focus on sustainability. Current global trends have demonstrated the need for planning healthy and sustainable communities. One trend is the increasing impact of greenhouse gases on the world's climate and another is the decreasing supply of resources that support life. Sustainability is defined as aligning our built environment and socioeconomic activities with the natural systems that support life. In the long run, sustainability means adapting human activities to the constraints and opportunities of nature. The steel figure below is a graphic representation of a sustainable community. Each ring represents one of the Three E's: the environment, the economy and social equity. Each of these rings is connected to, and dependent upon the others. . INSERT Figure 5 1 "The Three Spheres of Sustainable Growth" from Pale 5-2 of the draft Comprehensive Plan The design of a sustainable community in Orange County means that this Comprehensive Plan will strive, in its implementation, to link the economy, the environment and social equity to improve the vitality of all three of these domains. The meaning of sustainability can be further understood by examining four basic principles regarding human needs, natural systems, and the relationships between them. , 1. For a given natural resource, if the depletion rate exceeds the replacement rate, the resource will be available for only a finite time. Thus, unchecked use of resources has implications for our future generations. 2. Human activity produces harmful substances, which must be mediated to maintain balance in the natural systems. Human-generated waste, such as plastics, sewage, and carbon monoxide, must be carefully managed to minimize and eliminate damage to the earth. 3 . Earth's ecosystems, of which humans are a part along with other living beings, are interdependent and most stable when they include a diversity of species. Overuse and pollution of the natural environment has implications for maintaining the earth's biodiversity. 4. Human needs span physical, economic, environmental, cultural, social, and spiritual dimensions. Human needs can be met equitably, justly, and with dignity without compromising the physical environment. Achieving greater fairness is essential for social stability and the cooperation needed for making large-scale changes within the framework laid out by the first three principles. These global principles are locally relevant because our community is part of a region, part of a continent, and part of a world. Our individual and collective decisions and actions affect the quality of human life and the quality of our natural environment not only in the local community, but also in the world. By understanding these principles, and the consequences of continuing to violate them, we establish a common basis for working toward becoming a sustainable community. This page is intentionally left blank. Attachment 5.4 Insert the following tab-les afr2nd paragraph (Line 14) on Page 5-34_ T~L1~ V. AA. .. ~..w.~:. n..a.. ~., nr r,,, r.,...,+., i~aoa_~nn~~ ~ Au1C A. Ir1Q VI Juuulr~.~wnvaLw ~v~ ..~~ u~~ li VV M.~ior~Subdvisioris M~~i .:199 .~ 000 ' 2 1 `:~ 002 003,. '4 `~ : '2004 005 _ ~ 06 ota 1999- 06 Number of Major Subdivisions 12 12 12 5 6 4 2 3 56 Total Number of Lots Created 192 155 294 102 102 92 91 73 1101 Total Gross Acrea a of Lots Created * 617.2 211.18 684.56 153.52 265.22 236.15 81.87 73.4 2323.1 Avera a Gross Lot Size of Lots Created ac 3.21 1.82 2.07 1.56 2.6 2.57 0.9 1.01 2.0 Avera a Gross Lot Size -Rural Areas *** 3.21 2.85 2.93 2.18 2.6 2.57 1.96 1.6 2.5 Avera a Gross Lot Size -Urbanizin Areas "*** 0 0.79 1.2 0.93 0 0 0.6 0.6 0.5 Avera a Net Lot Size of Lots Created ac "'` 1.77 1.5 1.24 1.3 2.15 1.33 1.16 1.01 1.4 Avera a Net Lot Size -Rural Areas *** 1.7.7 1.73 1.97 1.91 2.15 1.33 1.8 1.6 1.8 Avera a Net Lot Size -Urbanizin Areas "*** 0 0.62 0.5 0.69 0 0 0.53 0.6 0.4 Avera e # of Lots Created er Subdivision 16 12.91 24.5 20.4 17 23 45.5 24.3 23.0 * Includes any acreage in deeded open space required to meet Flexible Subdivision open space standards. Althouah Flexible Subdivision provisions were created in 1996 then were rarely chosen until 2001 The Planning and Inspections Department began tracking flexible subdivisions in 1999. ** Excludes any acreage in deeded open space and roadways *** Rural areas are areas with private well and septic systems **'`* Urbanizing areas are areas with public water and sewer services. Source Oranae County Plannina and Inspections Department Key Conclusions from reviewing the county's major subdivision activity between 1999-2006 include: • There were nearly three times the number of Major Subdivisions created between 1999-2002 than befi _ • The number of lots created has significantly decreased since 1999 There were more than twice as many lots created between 1999-2002 than between 2003-2006. and roadways. Attachment 5.4 Table Y: Minor Subdivision Data for Oranae County (1999-2006) Minor Su divisions `' `1999 : 20,00. 1'`2001 i ~ ~-2003 :' ."2~ * X20 y'~ ~ 2~~ .6 ofa ' ` :.:2006.:: Number of Minor Subdivisions 58 42 24 39 25 25 44 25 282 Total Number of Lots Created * 106 95 54 79 66 51 114 61 626 Total Gross Acrea a of Platted new Lots * 341 323 168 259 199 198 437 247 2172 Avera a Lot Size of Platted new Lots ac 3.2 3.4 3.1 3.3 3 3.9 3.8 4 3.5 Avera e # of .new Lots er Subdivision 1.8 2.3 2.3 2 2.6 2 2.6 2.4 2.3 " Excludes residual lots and associated acreage. A residual lot may be defined as the parent parcel from which the subdivision was created. Source: Orange County Planning and Inspections Department K~Conclusions from reviewing the county's minor subdivision activity between 1999-2006 include: • -~setween .i yy ana ~uu~ t ere were suantiy more ivnnor suoaivisions per year ana more ots createa tnan aunna the penoa ~uu3- 2006. The near 2005 is a notable exception with 114 lots created. • Average lot sizes and number of lots created per subdivision remained fairly consistent for the years 1999-2006. Attachment 5.4 According to State law subdivision of lots that are 10 or more acres iri size are considered "Exempt subdivisions."_ Table Z shows the statistics on exempt subdivision in the county from 1999-2006. _ -s_ r___W~L n..a_J:__:~:~.- 1"1~L.. i... A..ww..w ^.~.~.r.f~i r~loao_~nrt~~ 1 dUltl L- GAGIIIN~ •7UUUIVL71V~1 vaa.a w~ v~guMC v v.au~• a ~ v..v-~....... i Total ' 9.999 Exempt Subdivisions 1999 ~~-~ .2001 ` 2 ' 2003 -. t10 ~ 20b5 2006. :2006 Number of 10+ acre Exem t Subdivisions 44 48 43 35 23 35 42 25 295 701 Total Number of Lots Created 103 103 90 107 67 65 109 57 Total Acrea a of Subdivisions 1 198 1 206 1 138 1 211 774 923 1299 749 8498 Avera a Lot Size of Lots Created 12 1 Z 13 11 12 14 12 13 12.4 Avera e# of Lots Created er Subdivision 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2.3 * Excludes residual lots and associated acreage Residual lots are defined as parent parcels twenty (201 acres or more from which the 1999-2002 figures obtained using Orange County Land Records Dept. data 2003-2006 figures obtained using Planning and Inspections Department data Source• Oranae County Planning and Inspections Department Kev Conclusions from reviewing the county's exempt subdivision activity between 1999-2006 include: exception. • Since 2003 the total acreage of Exempt Subdivisions has significantly decreased below the annual average experienced between 1999-2006 (1 062 acres) with 2005 as a notable exception. • Average lot size excluding residual acreage has remained consistent averagina approximately 12 acres. • Most Exempt Subdivisions contain only two (2) or three (3) lots. This page is intentionally left blank. Attachment 6.2 Add Map Cultural Resources (unincorporated portions of Orange County) ~, ; • ? }% !j ; fir{ t)sbnlal HerRape BYwiY. ~..~`,yn ~~ D ~ j •' ~ i L`ti'i. d ~ i J • •~ \ ® Y~ t '~ ~'~',.~~~;.M ~ //yyyyiiCCenbn MifbniiRpM[~r ~: i v.. ;GUE..C C ' ~4 _~ `` y~./ ; 0utly l.lit lllsAPrle D/if'let y ~ ~: ; ! FG6C3e A; : x ' . L..__ _~ ,`. ry i; ~ , Cedar Graxe+ uref Crossr ~ s / ~. . Y--- ` ~ \ \ ~ ` ~ a I ~ ~ , \ 1 ,fr / \, /j~ i ~ \ ....~t._._. t f~ ~ .. c ~ ~~ 1$ i ,,.. _14:R'kAi%sr cr ~K ! 3 i _ K~ ~ w ; 55m ' .i HILLSBbROlJ61i '~ :~ >'t'J i ,; ~ ~ ' 5 ~ 'S'Q_ _ M ANC w Ta'~. f'L3 '~4K ~ ~~ ~~ I i /(~J ~ _~Y DTI , '\Y ~ i ~ _ " , ,~ ~ tH 3~ j`~ 3 t/,,... >s`` cam/ ``~''~ ~~~£ •~ ; r - . a: .:• . ~ 5cotrWdrhHerthgs..-. ' ' 1 a~Y "`'"~,r...' i' : ~ r ~ Yy ;t ``~ ~ F .7~ ~- ; '~. ~ ~5:~:; ~~ 1~1 '~?'L~. ~~.. I 1tt ! ~ _ _... s ( ~ / l!riUaRNKt RQ, y ~~ ' ~ .. ~J . J/ , (f , ~_ ~ , t"fiZEalu Na(bnd Rapkter 3fudy flit i 'r 1 t . ' ~ ,,,_. ~rerle DpWat , 1 : . ~ + ~... ~~ ~ j ~.._.._ r ~ .~ f .., \ ;',:r~µ~< " ~f~APEL 1-{ILL -r.... ~'' ~ GttRRBOR~ T ~~ .. . j F9otball Road t? ~ ~ S`"'..- ~ fy, ~.., 615 MLp PIpi1W Oy legend omPi caib North (~mtlna Scenic Byways ®Local Landmark 8 National Register 6Mrmmart 6 Ra.wia Munidpal t7JS * National Regster can"~ o.P.nn~~r ~~ ~ National Re0lsfer HistDde District ._....-Main roads '-~ National Replster Study List ~ Nae:rw.m,P a.~noe Ndweira.~e..rr..auc.sa m~ ~~ ~~ cwP~ ~~ ~~ r , n oKr mm.w,x~+ryd.sman. Lakes C] National Register Study List Historic District FIGURE 6.3: CULTURAL RESOURCES This page is intentiona{ly left blank. Attachment 6.4.1 Chart missing title: Acres along the !eft column and Number of Farms along the right column. . FIGURE 6=1: ORANGE COUNTY AGRICULTURE, .1959-2002 160, 000 ---_ ~ .. < _ ., --~-- 1, 600 - 140,000 ~ '` 1,400 a. :120, 000 1,200 _~~ 100;000. 1, OOOy ~} 00,000 800 LL. Q ~ o 60,000 -- ~ 600 40,000 - ~ 400 , -. 20,000 _ ~ ~ _ 200... ~: €~ 1959 1964 1969 1974 1978 1982 1987'1992 1997 2002 Oland 1n Farms 145,9 131',5 110,7 87,81 87,34 90,57 81,10 67,49 72,67 71,01 ~~# of Farms 1,418. 1.,195 895 631 564 X599 1522 433;' 577.: 627 .Source: 1959-2002 Census of Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture This page is intentionally left blank. Attachment 6.4.3.1 2 3 4 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 THE CENTURY FARM PROGRAM The Century Farm program provides yet another honorary program for North Carolina farmers. This special .program was initiated in 1970 when the North Carolina State Fair chose to highlight its theme "Salute to Agriculture" by searching for North Carolina families who had maintained active farms for more than ;- --- -------- - - - - -- -- 100 years. Today almost 1,600 farms are listed in the program including fifteen from Orange County. ' Agriculture and preservation work hand- in-hand to preserve and conserve cultural landscapes. Honorary programs such as the Local Landmark Program, the National Register of Historic Places, and the Century Farm Program provide opportunities for recognition, awareness, and preservation of Orange ~ County's rich agricultural history. Participation can offer financial incentive tax credits and/or property tax deferment dovetail with agricultural programs su Districts and agricultural conservati awareness for agri-tourism and direct minimize nuisance-related concerns.Z ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Orange County has sponsored numerous archaeological surveys, particularly in the last five years. Information from these projects is shared with the Office of State Archaeology but is not made public due to salvage concerns. Since the design of Little River Park and Natural Area in 1999, the County has conducted cultural resources surveys as part of the master plan design process for new parks. In October of 2006, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a new policy requiring cultural and archaeological surveys for all County development projects. Surveys are conducted by archaeological consultants who meet National standards and typically include: background research, systematic surface and subsurface investigation (digging based on a grid system), field reconnaissance, and a reporting of the results. Information from these surveys can be used to assist in the siting of future facilities and/or for identifying areas of historic and cultural interest for possible interpretation. ' The Orange County farmers include: Elbert H. Allison; N. K. Andrews; Elizabeth N. Blalock, Thomas N. Blalock, James, M. Blalock; J. Fred Bowman, Betty Bowman; Jane M. Branscome, L. M. Merritt, E. Mangum; Flora Dick Dellinger, Edna Dellinger, Cothran Dellinger, Gene Dellinger; Estelle Haley, Frances H. Griffin, Wade E. Griffin; Katherine L. Kirkpatrick; Floyd Fox Miller; A. Gordon Neville; Ralph Neville (Heirs): Anne Neville Williams, Jane Neville Hatley, Bryant Neville, Claude Neville; Shelton L. Ray; Richard Roberts, Ollie Roberts; Bryant J. Walker; and L. Phillip Walker. z See also information on Barn Again! in the Trends Section of this chapter and in the Agricultural Chapter of this Element. s in the form of rehabilitation s. Preservation programs can ch as Voluntary Agricultural on easements to increase marketing purposes, and to 1 2 In addition to archaeological surveys conducted in advance of new 3 County development projects, local residents can also ensure the 4 documentation and preservation of valuable historic and prehistoric 5 archaeological resources. The value. of an artifact is in its context 6 (original location), its relationship with other artifacts, its structural 7 elements, or its relationship to natural features. Once removed from 8 their context many artifacts lose their value.3 Residents are encouraged 9 to use the Office of State Archaeology (OSA) to determine the 10 appropriate course of action regarding archaeological finds, particularly 11 .those that may involve oid cemetery sites. The OSA can help residents 12 record, map, and catalog sites, thus preserving valuable locations 13 information on the future. 14 HISTORIC CEMETERIE5 15 Historic cemeteries offer an invaluable link to the past. Often, smaller 16 family cemeteries are subject to abandonment and neglect over time, 17 resulting in the loss of valuable genealogical and historical information. 18 Increasing development in the region further jeopardizes these cultural 19 resources. The OSA can provide information on the State Cemetery 20 Survey and the state statutes (N.C.G.S. Chapter 70, Article 3), regarding 21 the handling of human skeletal remains." 22 SCENIC RESOURCES 23 During the late 1980s to mid 1990s, Orange County Planning staff, 24 working in conjunction with the Planning Board's Transportation 25 Advisory Subcommittee (TAS), researched scenic road programs in 26 other states and localities, and developed a proposal for Orange 27 County. The Scenic, Rustic, and Rural Roads Program separated 28 potential corridors into three categories based on the focus of their 29 designation-natural features, historic or cultural resources, or rural or 30 agricultural context. The group systematically ranked roads based on 31 criteria and produced a Scenic Road Corridors Map, which included 32 segments from fifty (50) local roads. (See Map 6-6: Scenic Roads Map.) 33 While, the initial proposal was voluntary, the map was included in the 34 Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and referenced in the 35 Flexible Development option of the Subdivision Regulations. Views 36 from the identified corridors are considered conservation areas in the 37 Flexible Development standards. 38 39 The HPC is currently evaluating the corridors shown on the 1981 maa 40 to determine which road segments still merit scenic designation. The s Archaeological research in the late 1970s and early 1980s fed to the creation of an "Archaeological Potential Map," which reflected the likelihood of finding resources based on topographic features, such as ridges and drainageways. The map lacks the precision to replace site specific-fieldwork for predicting the location of archaeological resources and should only be used as a general guide. " ERCD works with the Durham-Orange Genealogical Society of North Carolina (D-OGS) to inventory cemeteries in Orange County; information on their cemetery census is available online. 4v~an~,~i Cc1u.v~ty Co--vtprehe~ ~laNV Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 6- 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 HPC has also been working to develop a new heritagelscenic corridor program As development continues to occur rural roads and their associated agricultural vistas may become compromised unless additional measures are adopted. The North Carolina Scenic BLrwavs Program offers another form of recognition to special road corridors that contribute to the visual ~C ~CE~C character of a community. Honorary in nature: there is no regulatory BYWAY component to the program, nor any preemptive development restrictions. Three North Carolina Scenic Byw~s pass through Orange County-the Colonial Heritage Byway. the Football Road, and the Scots-Welsh Byway. (See Map 6-3 in the Summary section of this Element.) H}GHWAY MARKER PROGRAM The North Carolina Highway Historical Marker Program was established in 1935, based on the marker program in Virginia established -in 1926. The Department of Cultural Resources' Research Branch and the Department of Transportation's Traffic Engineering Branch, Division of Highways administer the program jointly. Eligibility is subject to specific criteria based on state significance. Unlike the recognition of historic structures or archaeological sites, the markers typically commemorate important individuals who have been dead for twenty- five or more years. Today there are more than 1,400 state markers throughout North Carolina, at least one in every county. Orange County currently has twenty-four markers, including those within the towns of Chapel Hill and Hillsborough.s 5 The twenty-four North Carolina State Highway Historical Markers located in Orange County include: G-3 Thomas Burke; G-4 William Hooper 1 742-1790; G-9 Archibald Debow Murphey; G-10 Francis Nash; G-11 Thomas Ruffin; G-16 Thomas Burke; G-19 Edmund Fanning; F-23 Regulators Hanged; G-26 Thomas H. Benton; G-33 Occaneechi; G-37, G-38, G-39 Bingham School; G-40 William A. Graham; G-48 Paper Mill; G-64 Moses A. Curtis; G-66 Hughes Academy; G-84 Old Eno Church and Cemetery; G-88 North Carolina Society of the Cincinnati; G-90 St. Mary's Chapel; G-92 University of N.C. at Chapel HiN; G-100 Harriet M. Berry 1877- 1940; G-103 J. G. de Roulhac Hamilton; G-108 James Hogg 1972-1804; G-11 5 Elizabeth Keckly ca. 1820-1907; G-122 Hart's Mill. Orav-~iCoY.wtty Co--~reh~ve~~taw Public Hearing Draft 5-8-08 Page 6- 46 1 2 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 A end: ~~~~~~~ S~~ni~ ~tt~at~ ~c~nc ~o~r~dar i~o~d~ ,~ ~.~. ~. ~.~..~ MAP 6-6: ORANGE COUNTY SCENIC CORRIDORSi~9AB5~ MAP Oi~a.EU~e'Cau.~2ty Ca-n~Yeh~w~~T.avt~ Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 6- 47 Scenic Roads Corridors Attachment 6.4.5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Another watershed within the Neuse basin in northeastern Orange County is the Little River Watershed. The Little River features a North Fork and South Fork in Orange County, before the two merge downstream in Durham County. Finally in the Neuse, the headwaters of the Flat River are located in far northeastern Orange County. Both the Little River and Flat River continue east into Durham County into reservoirs before joining the Eno in Falls Lake. These are also water supply watersheds far Durham County. Southern and western Orange County lies within the Cape Fear. River Basin. The Cape Fear River begins a few milese~tte~ge~ south of €re~-Jordan Lake, southeast of Orange County, and flows to the Atlantic Ocean south of Wilmington, but its headwaters lie far to the west, north of Greensboro. In this region, the Haw River and other streams feed Jordan Lake. a large reservoir located southeast of the County line. -and thence the Cape Fear. Many of these streams flow west/southwest into the Haw River or south and east into New Hone Creek/River- -the collector stream for the portion of the Cape Fear basin in Orange County. The Haw itself is the southwestern boundary of Orange County, and also has the distinction of being the only river or stream that touches Orange County from an upstream source. Within the Cape Fear Basin in Orange County are severalfl~q watersheds that drain to the Haw: Back Creek and Haw Creek to the northwest and west, and Cane Creek and Collins Creek to the southwest. In the southeastern Hart of the County. mod-Morgan Creek flows into Jordan Lake. and New Hope Creek and its tributaries flow east and south to briefly become the New Hope River just before entering _lordan Lake.-t-~-in~tTre~~ Wihfater supply impoundments within the Cape Fear in Oranaet~County include Cane Creek Reservoir and University Lake. Portions of western Orange County in the Cape Fear basin drain west into Quaker Creek Reservoir northeast of Mebane. Finally, a small portion of northwestern Orange County is part of the Roanoke River Basin, and the two streams in this area -North Hyco Creek and South Hyco Creek, drain north into Caswell County and the Dan River. The Dan straddles the North Carolina-Virginia border and eventually becomes the Roanoke River, flowing east to Albemarle Sound. In all, there are 15 different watersheds in Orange County within these three river basins. {See Map 6-9). 1 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 Orange County Watersheds >: defied 1Nater Supply irotacted YVater Supply scalJsraa :r Basin Boundary arY1S icipal Jurisdictions =:~.~ ;.,,., ~ aptacv psvivus vwsiom Caxxty TsxbSg Ordixaxw ,,,,,~„- ~~~.R ..:. a. o..,.. ~ ~...,. MAP 6-9: ORANGE COUNTY WATERSHEDS. Ov~a~iCat,cvt~y Go-wipF e~t.ev~;vei~lcwt, Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 6-2 Attachment 8.4.6 CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Established in 1909, T#e Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools CHCCS provides educational services to school-age residents of the two Towns and some unincorporated areas near the Towns. The district operates three high schools, four middle schools, aid ten elementary schools, a school for young people being treated at UNC Hospital, and an alternative program for high school students. These schools w#isf~ serve more than 11,000 students. -r";° °"°+°^~ ;~ nne r,f +ho }nn i1 (1 cnF~r.r~l iJiotrinfc• in 4h.~ I Ini}erl C~~~oc .~nr) the inn r~crfnrminn wn v, r, ,v avr.. . v ........... ....v......w. .. .. ,.. .....,..... ............ ........ ..... ....~.. ~...............y , s . CHCCS employs 1,870 staff members, of whom 1 150 are teachers or administrators. The The mission included in the CHCCS Strategic School Plan for 29A2-2008-2013 ~~~„~s;on~f ~n~s «~~,,.,.,,~~ fir ~„o~, ~+,,,~e.,+» is "Empower all students to acquire the knowledge, skills and insights necessary to live rewarding, productive lives, prepared. to contribute positively to the global community." The plan laid out annual capital expenditures for school facility and recreational expansion, identified funding sources for these projects, and set a schedule for implementation. '^ +~- *~ti The school district ' updates its strategic plan regularly. ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT The Orange County School District provides public education services to student- age residents of Hillsborough, the portion of Mebane that lies in Orange County, and most of the unincorporated areas of the County. It operates seven elementary schools, three middle schools, and two high schools, and an alternative school. Orange County Schools has a projected enrollment of 7,000 students for the 2008-2009 school year. Board approved capital improvements for fiscal year 2007-2008 include over $2 million of improvements to existing facilities, including maintenance of heating and cooling systems, bathrooms,, updating health and safety features, and improving athletic facilities. pr~fo c•inn~+l ~ e~+r.,in.. ('~~mm~ ~nifin .Y...ao~. The district provides its students with a wide range of excellent educational opportunities, The ~nhi In~orn~~ir~nol R~nn~l~~ ~ra~fo Drnnr~m in +L~o (~ni ~n4v1 In 2008, Orange County Schools completed a series of studies that will increase efficiency and improve responsiveness district-wide. The Orange County Board of Education approved a re-allocation of Title I funding that will provide district resents with three pre-kindergarten classrooms for early intervention. In the fall of 2003, Orange County Schools organized a task force of parents, students, community members, teachers, school administrators, and other staff to develop afive-year strategic plan for the district, which was later adopted by the district. Since that time, the plan has guided programmatic, operational, and financial decisions within the district, using five overarching priorities; 1. High Student Achievement; 2. Healthy Students in Safe and Caring Schools; 3. Quality Teachers, Administrators, and Staff; 4. Strong Family, Business, and Community Support; and 5. Effective and Efficient Operation. Attachment 9.0 ,. 1 ChApi~er 9. TYaysportAtvr~ tfeef7t' 2 9.1. PURP(3SE 3 This Transportation Element provides guidance and direction regarding future transportation 4 efforts in Orange County. The goals and objectives identified within this element serve as the 5 foundation for establishing future transportation policies and action strategies undertaken by 6 Orange County, its advisory boards, and staff. This specific process for developing a 7 transportation implementation strategy is outlined in Section 1.4; Administration and 8 Implementation Guidelines. 9 9.Z. SUMMARY 10 Orange County's transportation system is often described as a network. The term network 11 describes a collection of destinations and eelge~ COnneCtlOnS. On the ground in a 12 transportation network, the destinations would be areas where people live and destinations 13 people have outside their homes, places like work, shopping centers, parks, government 14 offices, etc. {~ge~s COnneCtiOnS are the routes people take to travel between nodes, 15 between home and work, for instance. Destinations and edges GUn/7eCt%Ot1S together can 16 be viewed as the physical structure of a transportation network. Another term, traffic, is used 17 to name the activity that takes place on the network. 18 Planning for a transportation system requires planning for destinations and edges 19 connections, as well as traffic. All three components are essential for a logical, robust 20 network. 21 22 Orange County's transportation network is comprised of a hierarchy of roads that moves 23 automobiles and provides access to land developments, railroad lines that allow freight and 24 commuter trains to move through the County, bicycle routes that provide access to points of 25 interest and recreational trails, and local sidewalks and pedestrian facilities that foster walking 26 in neighborhoods, downtowns, and at commercial and employment centers. 27 28 While the County, in partnership with the Towns of Hillsborough, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and 29 Mebane, has been along-standing proponent of a multi-modal transportation system, more 30 can be done to encourage non-automobile forms of transportation. New facilities and 31 improvements are needed to encourage a more efficient and effective transportation system 32 that achieves the County's goals of achieving long-term sustainability and maintaining Orange 33 County's distinctive community character. 34 TRANSPURTATtON Pt~1NNtNG 35 . R~~~. ~ ~~~ 36 37 38 39 40 , 41 ~ - - - '. 42 43 44 ^°""''• Chapter 9: Transportation ~7ement Transportation P/annin_g in Orange County is _guided by 3 federal legislation that requires states to carry out a continuin_q, 4 cooperative, and comprehensive statewide mu/timodal transportation s planningg process. that facilitates the safe and efficient management, 6 operation, and development of surface transportation systems that ~ will serve the mobility needs of people and freight (including s accessible pedestrian walkways and bicycle transportation facilities) 9 and that fosters economic growth and development within and i o between States and urbanized areas, while minimizing transportation- s i related fuel consumption and air pollution in all areas of the State, 12 including those areas subject to the metropolitan transportation 13 planningg requirements. The "three-C" process (continuin_q, 14 cooperative, comprehensive) includes the development of a long is range statewide transportation plan and statewide transportation 16 improvement program (STIP). The State Lon_g Range Transportation 17 Plan and Transportation Improvement Program is developed in 1 s cooperation with the Metropolitan P/annin_g Organization designated 19 by federal /e_gislation for the metropolitan area. The State consults 20 with the Iocal officials of the affected nonmetropo/itan area to develop 21 the transportation plan and TIP for nonmetropolitan areas. 22 23 The Durham-Chapel Hilf-Carrboro (DCHC) Metropolitan Planning 24 Organization (MPO) is the regional organization responsible for 2s transportation planning in the western part of the Research Triangle 25 area, includin_g the eastern, and more urban, portions of Orange 27 County. The DCHC MPO Transportation Advisory Committee, the 2s ~olicy and decision making body of the organization, is made up of 29 elected officials from the local jurisdictions in the Metropolitan Area 3o Boundary, the North Carolina Department of Transportation member 31 representin_g the area. The Triangle Area Rural Planning Organization 32 (TARPO) coordinates the transportation plannin_q in the rural areas 33 outside the Metropolitan Area Boundary of Orange County and 34 Chatham County and for all of Lee and Moore Counties. The TARPO 3s Rural Transportation Advisory Committee (RTAC) is made up of 36 elected ofificials of the member jurisdictions and the Division S North 37 Carolina Board of Transportation member. These are the two 3s organizations through which Orange County coordinates its plans for 39 local transportation proiecfs for implementation through regional 4o pro_grams. Map 9-~ shows the transportation planning jurisdictions in 41 the Research Triangle region. Ora~.Go~uv~ty Co7vyw~eh~iwe~~7.asv Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-2 ••''"'°- Chapter 9: Transportation EIement 2 "' 3 4 5 6 9 11 13 15 17 19 ~~ 21 23 25 Urainge Qult~ 27 E 29 31 33 35 37 39 ~.~~~.. ~. 41 ~~~ 43 ~` Chatham 45 47 '~ 49 .~~~~ ~ ;~~, 51 - "`` 53 ~~ 55 - ' ~~ hnston 57 ~~ ~' 59 b '~~ 61 63 : ` .~~~ 65 67 ~ MO+mc+~'-~ 69 Triangle Area RPO 71 ' - ~ ~ ~` 73 -Capital Area MPt) 75 ~ ~ ~ Durham-Chapel Hilo-Carrbora MPO 77 ~~..~, 79 - Burlington-Graham F~}PD 81 ; ~ ~: 83 ~,F~ :~ Municipal Boundaries 85 87 MAP 9-1: REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS 89 91 93 95 97 Map 9-2, below, shows the boundari~5 of the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro 99 Metropolitan Planning Organizati6~ and the Triangle Area Rural Planning 101 Organization within Orange County. o~- coY,~vtty cif-eh~•i~v~ ~~avv Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-3 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Chapter 9: Transportation Element Insert map of MPO boundary in Orange County. 52 The Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (M PO) 53 coordinates planning and development of transportation facilities in its jurisdiction through 54 two primary planning mechanisms: Discuss - LRTP first, then MTIP ©rax~eiCo~uvity Cas~v~e~p,~lan, Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9_y. Chapter 9: Transportation Element .,. 2 ^ Long-Range Transportation Plan. The plan is a guide for major transportation 3 investments in the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning 4 Organization area. It is designed to support land use and air quality goals for 5 the urban area, and is prepared in accordance with federal requirements. The 6 plan projects the amount and type of transportation demand over a 20-year 7 minimum period, and is updated every four years to 8 demonstrate compliance with air quality standards. It 9 identifies priority highway, bus transit, rail transit, bicycle, and pedestrian 10 improvements needed to service future populations, and the projected costs of 11 these improvements. The Long Range Transportation Plan is 12 fiscally constrained and identifies viable anticipated 13 funding sources for proiects proposed in the plan. 14 ~- 15 __ _ , 16 17 - ~,.~~mtR,~~ ~~a~~, 18 19 ~ Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program. 20 , 21 , 22 23 24 2s This program is a seven year document that is included in 26 the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program and 27 contains funding and schedulin_g information for bicycle: 28 pedestrian, highway, rail, public transportation, and 29 enhancement protects. Every two years, the Metropolitan 3o Planning Organization develops a prioritizeaf list of 31 protects to be considered for funding in the biennial 32 update of the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement 33 Program. Projects must come from adopted 34 transportation plans. 35 -- 36 , 37 38 39 , 40 ~- 41 42 43 44 , 4~a.~~Co-uftity CompF-eh.~ive~~T.a~w Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-5 •""'~`''• Chapter 9: Transportation Element ~. 5 6 7 -~~atta~-; 8 •- 9 ~; 10 •- 11 12 13 ~- 14 is 16 17 18 ~1 -5-pt~~a~--; 19 20 The Trian_g!e Area Rural Planning Organization (TARPO) coordinates 21 the transportation planning in the rural areas of ()range County and 22 Chatham County outside the Metropolitan Boundary Area and for all 23 of l.ee and Moore Counties. (See Map 9-1.) Triangle J Council of 24 Governments is the administrator and lead planning agency for the 2s TARPO, .and coordinates transportation plans and programs and 26 /and use policies and programs in the four-county planning area 27 The -general purpose and responsibilities of the Rural Planning 28 Organization are to: 29 30 7. Develop long-range local and regional multi-modal 31 transportation Alans in cooperation with the area Metropolitan 32 Planning Or_ganizafions (MPOs) and the NCDOT. 33 34 2. Provide a forum for public participation in the rural 3s transportation planning process. 36 37 3. Develop and prioritize suggestions for transportation proiects 3s that the RPO believes should be included in the State 39 ~ Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 40 41 4, Provide transportation-related information to local governments 42 and other interested organizations. 43 ©~'a:t~u~iCcrc,utity Co~w~v~e~~f''T,ciw Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-6 Chapter 9: Transportation Element h1 4. ~~ 3 4 , 5 6 The Orange Unified Transportation Board (OUTBoard) is made up of ~ 74 citizens and two ex-officio liaisons from the Board of County s Commissioners. The OUTBoard provides recommendations to the 9 Board of County Commissioners re_gardin_g overall planning and 1o programming of transportation improvements in the County, 11 including: 12 13 Identifying and setting priorities for the County's roadway and transit needs 14 along with associated costs and specific sources of funding; 15 ^ Assisting in development and review of the transportation component of the 16 comprehensive plan; 17 Providing recommendations to the Board regarding Federal and State 18 legislation affecting transportation in Orange County; and 19 Exploring and make recommendations on innovative techniques and methods 20 to improve the efficiency and capacity of existing and future transportation 21 systems. 22 23 EE-3H~N~-i~f+B~--RAA-B-~N~E~BitiE 24 ~__ _ ,-.... .~_ ..a _ _~_ 25 , 26 , 27 8 " - 8 dE 9 -Pd~ ~ d-~C--r ~ _... __,....,, ~ , ~. 2 ;,;~e- 9 rst~te-~5-; -R;i~s~a-fe gv ~ v3 ~~~d~E ~ ~; P ~ 4 ~ ~ r ~ . 2 30 3 , 1 32 33 34 35 36 , 37 38 39 40 ; , 41 42 OraCay Covv~v~eh~%v~~tavv Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-7 °°"""• Chapter 9: Transportation EIement ~~N 2 COUNTY-WIDE ROAD NETWORK 3 Orange County's road network is comprised of a hierarchy of roads 4 includin_g interstates, major US and NC highways, North Carolina s Secondary Roads, and local roads that serve different functions in 6 providing access to other regions and within Orange County s fnterstate 40 and Interstate 85 are part of the Federal Interstate 9 Highway System and are the major corridors that provide for io transport of people and goods through Orange County to other i i regions, including employment centers in the Triangle Area (Durham, i2 Research Triangle Park and Raleigh) to the east and the Triad 13 (Greensboro, Winston-Salem and High Point) to the west. 14 is M_1or US and NC routes linking Orange County with surrounding i6 areas also provide intra-county access and linkage to the rural areas i7 of the County, US 70 is a major highway that provides east-west i s access through Orange County, linking the City of Durham in Durham 19 County, the Town of Hillsborough in Orange County and the Town of 20 Mebane in Alamance County. US T5 and US 507 provide north-south 21 access linkin_g the City of Durham to the Towns of Chapel Hill and 22 Carrboro and the Town of Pittsboro in Chatham County, NC 86 23 provides north-south access through Orange County from Caswell 24 County and links the Towns of Hillsborough and Chapel Hill. NC 57 2s provides north-south access from Person County through Orange 26 County to the Town of Hillsborough. NC 54 provides linkage between 27 Research Triangle Park in Durham and Wake Counties, the Towns of 2s Chape! Hill and Carrboro, and Greensboro in Guifford County. 29 3o A widespread state-maintained system of Secondary Roads provides 31 access to the major regional corridors from the rural areas of the 32 County, 33 34 Local roads emphasize the land access function, and connect rural 35 residential and commercial development with the Secondary Road 36 System and major US and NC corridors. 37 38 Map 9-3 below illustrates how Orange County road network functions to provide 39 inter-county and intea-county access. 4raCo~u-tity Co-wy~~eh~vr~,:NV~l~.rv Public Hearing Draft 5-6-D8 Page 9-8 Chapter 9: Transportation Element 3 5 7 9 11 13 1S 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 ©ra~iCo~,u2ty Co-~n~r~e~+~we~~T,~ Public Hearing Draff 5-6-OS Page 9-9 ORANGE COUNTY MAJOR ROADS Chapter 9: Transportatfon Element ... 2 3 ALTERNATIVE MODES OF TRANSPORTATION 4 5 . 6 Orange County residents have several options for using alternative 7 modes of transportation. s 9 Three public transportation systems provide bus service in Orange to Coun 11 12 Triangle Transit ~,~~u~.: ;• +,'~e "'1'~'< ~" YY°trya° °~ i.,, ° ° ~'r~- avvauv j' v a" "b vv" ~y w wv i~vo , 14 _ , 15 16 i~e~e-- the "TT" provides regional bus service 17 linking the Town of Chapel Hill to Research Triangle Park, 18 Raleigh-Durham International Airport, Duke University, NC 19 State University, and other key regional locations. TT 20 also contracts with Orange Public Transportation (the 21 "Orange Bus") to provide service between the Towns•of 22 Hillsborough and Chapel Hill." In addition, TT has a 23 vanpool program for commuters that have agreater -than 24 2U-mile round-trip. 25 Chapel Hill Transit -the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and the University 26 of North Carolina-Chapel Hill partner to provide daily fare free bus service to 27 routes in Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Services include fixed route bus service, 28 park and ride shuttle service for special events, shared ride feeder service to 29 areas which do not receive regular bus service, and EZ rider service for 30 individuals with mobility limitations. Many of the bus stops are shared with ~ 31 TT, and provide access to the larger regional bus system. 32 ^ Orange Public Transportation -Orange County provides bus ~~a 33 "' 34 3s service to Couniy residents on the "Orange Bus" 36 includin_g fixed route (in partnership with TT) general 37 public service, door to door pick-up and drop-off service 38 for human service contracting agencies, deviated fixed 39 route service for the _general public, and paratransit 4o service for disabled residents. 41 42 Private Sector Transportation Services - Several for profit private 43 sector Transportation Services. services are available to transport Q~- c~t.W-zy co-~Yex~~:~.~ ~t~, Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-YO ••'"'~`"• Chapter 9. Transportation EIement `'" " " individuals and groups and maybe more cost efiFective for 3 some transportation needs than the above named systems. 5 6 7 8 9 io Oran_ge County residents have opportunities to ride=share through 11 various private transportation providers as well as through Triangle 12 Transit's vanpool program. TT also hosts a website for Share the 13 Ride NC, a statewide ride share matching service for both local and 14 inter-county trips. is 16 Orange County has an active bicycling community that uses Orange 17 county roads for recreational riding, competitive trainin_g, and 18 commutin_g. Orange Couniy's Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies 19 major routes for improvements to facilitate bicycle commutes. The 20 Bicycle Transportation Plan is included in the re_giona! DCHC Long 21 Range Transportation Plan. Although there are currently no bicycle 22 lanes on Orange County roads outside municipalities, Orange County 23 has been able to obtain modest improvements for bicycles, such as 24 two=foot paved shoulders on secondary roads, through NCDOT 2s programs for resurfacing roads and spot safety projects. A State 26 Transportation Improvement Program project that will identify popular 27 _cyclinp routes on an Orange County Bike Map is underway, and 2s should be completed by the end of 2008. NCDOT will install numbered 29 bike route signs as part of the overall development of the county bike 3o route system. 31 32 There are no pedestrian trails outside of parks and greenways. 33 However, several plans outline a connected trail system throughout. 34 the County through parks and environmentally sensitive areas along 3s floodplains from Chapel Hill Road in Durham. 36 37 Amtrak passenger service traverses central Orange County through 38 the Town of Hil/sborou_gh, but currently does not stop in Orange 39 County. There is widespread community support for a passenger 4o train stop in Orange Gounty. All /oca! County jurisdictions, in early 41 2008, indicated their support for a train station to be located in 42 Hil/sborou_gh and the_Town of Hillsborough requested North Carolina Orav~.q~Co~wv-~y Co-rv~v~eh~UVe~~7.a.w Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-II °"''~`'`° Chapter 9: Transportation Element "~ Department of Transportation Rail Division, North Carolina 3 Railroad .and fhe National Railroad Passenger Corporation to consider 4 addrn_g a stop rn Hillsborough. Officials with the N C Department of s Transportation and Amtrak, in Ju/y 2008, confirmed that a passenger 6 ~ tram stop in HiNsborough is a financially viable endeavor according to ~ a financial impact analysis conducted by Amtrak s ©ra.~e~Cc~.wity Cc3-vn~reh~%vPiPlayt, Public Hearing Draft 5-6-08 Page 9-12 Draff County Profile (Data) Element Tables/Charts Table: B2b County and Municipal Population by Race /Ethnicity North Carolina 8,049,313 72.1% 21.6% 1.4% 1.2°0 4.8% 4.7% 'B(ack`or Asian and Native .'~: 'OtherlTwo Hispanicyor . i . Total . ~ African .v. ~ ~ ;Pacific , ... . American/i' . or More ~ Latino:.: 'Place 'Population White . ' . 'American Islander ~ ` ndian ' , ".Races ' Ethnicity '~Orange;County 115,531 78.0% 13.8% 4.1% 0.4% 4.1% 4.5% ~Carrboro 1.6,782 72.7% 13.5% 5.2% 0.004% 8.7% 12.3% Chapel Hill ~ 46,019 82.5% ~ 12.1 % 7.6% 0.004% 3.6% 3.4% Hillsborough 5,446. 60.3% 34.8% 0.6% 0.005% 4.3% 2.$% Mebane ~ 7,284 77.4% 17.5% 0.6% 0.002% 4.5% 5.2% and Sources: 'Total population for multi-county towns. Source: U.S.Census Bureau (2000, corrected) ~~ 't"" N G`~ Page 1 9/24/2008Attachment B2b Appendices This page is intentionally left blank. Attachment K U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION Criteria for Evaluation The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, and: A. That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B. That are associated with the lives of significant persons in or past; or C. That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. That have yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in history or prehistory. Criteria Considerations Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have achieved significance within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register. However, such properties will qualify if they are integral parts of districts that do meet the criteria or if they fall within the following categories: a. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or historical importance; or b. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is primarily significant for architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person or event; or c. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or d. A birthplace or grave of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no appropriate site or building associated with his or her productive life; or e. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a dignified manner as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the same association has survived; or f. A property primarily commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it with its own exceptional significance; or g. A property achieving significance within the past 50 years if it is of exceptional importance. This page is intentionally left blank. Attachment L The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretary's Standards, as they are often referred to, are listed below in their most current version (] 992). 1. A property shall be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property shall. be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties shall not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate,.shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials shat! not be used. 8. Archaeological resources shall be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. {Vew additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial .relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. . This page is intentionally left blank.