Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-19-1998 - 9aORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 19, 1998 Action Agenda Item No. _ Q SUBJECT: 1998 -2008 Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Adoption DEPARTMENT: County Manager/Budget PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/NS) BUDGET AMENDMENT: (Y/N) ATTACHMENT(S): 1998 -2008 CIP (previously distributed) Private Placement Project Costs /Timetables 5/8/98 Planning Staff Memo - Historical Perspective on Work of ADAB 5/12/98 Planning Staff Memo - Cost of Community Services Studies 5/12/98 Planning Staff Memo - Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program INFORMATION CONTACT: Rod Visser, ext 2300 Donna Dean, ext 2150 Don Belk, ext 2594 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732 -8181 Chapel Hill 968 -4501 Durham 688 -7331 Mebane 227 -2031 PURPOSE: To consider adoption of the 1998 -2008 Capital Investment Plan. BACKGROUND: On March 17, 1998, the County Manager presented the recommended 1998- 2008 Capital Investment Plan to the Board of County Commissioners. At its April 7, 1998 meeting, the Board conducted a public hearing and heard citizen comments regarding the proposed plan. At its meeting on April 21, 1998, the Board held further discussion about the CIP and identified additional information needed to facilitate final deliberations about the CIP. At the May 6, 1998 meeting, the Board discussed the possibility of including funding for implementation of the PACE program to promote farmland preservation. Apri121, 1998 Meeting Followup The Board requested detailed information about the elements, timetable, and costs of the three capital projects recommended to be funded through 1998 private placement financing. Staff have prepared spreadsheets which reflects this information for the Whitted Human Services Center and Northern Human Services Center renovation projects, and for the proposed replacement of the Chapel Hill Senior Center. The Board also asked for information about the duration that would be required for redirecting the one cent on the property tax rate that has been earmarked during the past three fiscal years. Staff estimates that most of the revenue from that annual earmarking would be required in the mix of pay - as- you -go revenue sources to fund the entire County CIP during the expected 15 year term of the private placement bank loan. However, in later years, some portion of that revenue could continue to be earmarked for the schooUpark reserve if the County's tax base continues to grow; if the '1 R County arranges a loan payment schedule with decreasing payments each year; if the Board G redirects funding from certain capital projects in the recommended CIP to the school /park reserve; or some combination of these three measures. It is staff s opinion that if the Board approves the CIP with all three private placement projects as recommended, that the County apply to the Local Government Commission for the approximately $4.8 million needed to accomplish the outlined project scope as one package. LGC approval would be needed no later than December, 1998 in order to secure the most favorable interest rates. In early 1999, the County will begin selling bonds approved by voters in the November 1997 referenda. For the next few years, the County will almost certainly not be "bank qualified" under IRS regulations as a small issuer (less than $10 million in debt incurred in any calendar year) because we will be selling $56 million worth of bonds over a multi -year period. We will remain bank qualified for 1998, which would allow us to incur private placement debt at a much lower interest rate (at least 1- 2% lower) than we would obtain if the lender were required to pay federal income tax on the interest paid to it by the County. Pursuing the $4.8 million as one private placement package will also be administratively easier and reduce staff time and legal and issuance costs, compared to a multi- phase approach or the issuance of Certificates of Participation (COPs). Any private placement funds that the County draws down but does not spend immediately would be placed in interest earning accounts. The rate that the County earns on its investments at this time is very close to the interest rate that the County would likely have to pay on any money borrowed. May 6, 1998 Meeting Followup The Board discussed a proposal to include $200,000 annually for the PACE program (see attached staff memos from Don Belk on the recent history of farmland preservation efforts in Orange County: Cost of Community Services Studies (COCS); and the Forsyth County farmland preservation program). The Manager recommends that if the Board decides that it wants to implement PACE, or some similar program, that funding in the first year of $100,000 be provided through an appropriation of $50,000 from the County capital project fund balance, and a $50,000 transfer from the General Fund from unanticipated property tax revenues that will likely be received in 1998 -99 from taxes on acreage removed from the land use program. In the second year, these appropriations could increase to $150,000 ($75,000 from both the County Capital Project and General Funds) in the second year, and to $200,000 by the third year. 1998 -2008 CIP Adoption Following further discussions and deliberations tonight, the Manager recommends that the Board adopt the 1998 -08 Capital Investment Plan, withholding decisions on any specific projects that may need further deliberation during the Board's budget work sessions in June. Approval of most, if not all, of the CIP at this time will afford staff sufficient time to prepare the numerous capital project ordinances that will need to take effect on July 1, 1998 in order to carry out the CIP. Ordinances for each capital project will be presented for formal adoption by the Board no later than the Board's final regular meeting for the 1997 -98 fiscal year on June 22. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board of Commissioners formally adopt the 1998 -2008 CIP, less any specific projects that the Board may identify as needing further deliberation during June 1998 budget work sessions. Project Timetable Project Northern Human Services Center Today's Date 5113198 8:07 W Calendar Year 1998 Calendar Year 1999 Calendar Year 2000 Calendar Year-2001 Estimated Cost Funding Source In Quarter (Ian-Mar 2nd Quarter A r- une 3rd Quarter ul S t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter (Ian-Mar) 2nd Quarter (Apr-June) 3rd Quarter (u -Set 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarter A r- unus e 3rd 4th Quarter Quarter -Dec 1st Quarter a 2nd Quarter - une 3rd Quarter ul S r 4th Quarter Oa Dec 1997 Park Bond (not included in Land Acquisition (including site 1998 -08 selection; owner negotiations, surveys, Recommended soil test etc. ) $110000 C1P Wastewater Treatment $ stem $85,000 Private Placement Design Process (including programming; schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Bidding Process (including solicitaion of bids; potential time for rebid; evaluation of bids and recommendation completed; bud award /contract approval by BOCC, contracts written; bonds received; revs ews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid; Corti tcate o Occtt an issued $280,000 Private Placement Windows and Doors Selection of a Lead Design Consultant (including RFP's solicited; 'short list' created and interviews held; recommendation o rusid; ted and BOCCapproval) Design Process (including programming schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing application submitted to LGC for review; LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion of bide potential time for rebid; evaluation of buds and recommendation completed; bud award /contract approval by BOCC, contracts written; bonds received, reviews cons leted' Chair signs) Construction (including site prepa ration of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid; Certi tcate o Occupancy issued W Project Timetable Project Northern Human Services Center Today's Date 5113198 8:07 4.1. Calendar Year 1998 Calen ar Year 1999 Calendar Year 2000 Calendar Yrar 2001 Estimated Cost Funding Source 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarto A n une 3rd Quarter ul - t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarter A r- une 3rd Quarter ul S t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarter A r- une/ 3rd Quarter uly- t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarto A r une) 3rd Quarter dy -Se s) 4th Quarter Oct. D,, Air Conditioning $330,000 Private Placement Selection of a Lead Design Consultant (including RFP's solicited,- 'sbort list' created and interviews held, recommendation fo rmulated and BOCCapproval) Design Process (including programming; schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGC )or review; LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion o %bids; potential time for rebid; evaluation of bide and recommendation completed; bid award /contract approval by BOCC, contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid, Certificate o Occu an issued $165,000 Private Placement Ceiling and Lighting Selection of a Lead Design Consultant ( including RFP's solicited; 'sbort list' created and interviews held,- recommendation formulated and BOCCapproval) Design Process (including programming; schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGC for review; LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion of bids; potential time for rebid; evaluation of bids and recommendation completed, bid award /contract approval by BOCC contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid; . Certificate of Occupancy issued 4.1. Project Timetable Project Northern Human Services Center Today's Date 5113198 8:07 Calendar Year 1998 _ Calendar Year 1999 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 41h 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Restrooms Design Process (including programming; schematic design, design development; construction document Quarter I Quartter l Quarter Ills[ Calendar Year 2001 2nd 3rd 4th Quarter Quarter Quarter Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGC for review; LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion of bide potential time for rebid; evaluation of bids and recommendation completed; bid award /contract approval by BOCC; contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid, Certificate o Occu an issued Parking Lots f165,000 Private Placement Selection of a Lead Design , Consultant (including RFP's solicited; 'short list' created and interviews held, recommendation formulated and BOCCa roval Design Process (including programming schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGC for review, LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion of bids; potential time for rebid; evaluation of bids and recommendation completed; bid award /contract approval by BOCC; contracts written; bonds received, reviews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid, Certificate o Occu an issued IlEstimated Total Project Cost I f 1 190 500 Un Project Timetable Project Whittted Human Services Center Today's Date 5113198 8:07 C, Calendar Year 1998 Calendar Year 1999 Calendar Year 2000 Calendar Year 2001 Estimated Cost Funding Source 1st Quarter an mar 2nd Quarter A r -une 3rd Quarter It - t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an -Mar 2nd Quarter A r -une 3rd Quarter ul -Se t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarter A r -une 3rd Quarter ul -S t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd 3rd 4th Quarter Quarter Quarter A r_- tine) ul -S t) Oct -Lute.) 112 cent sales tax RODE (included in $330,000 rts) Selection of a Lead Design Consultant (including RFP's solicited; 'short list'created and interviews held; recommendation formulated and BOCCapproval) Design Process (including programming; schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Bidding Process (including solicitaion o %bids; potential time %r rebid, evaluation o %bids and recommendation completed,- bid rp award /contract approval by BOCC, contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed; Chair ji ns Construction (including site preparation o/ clearing and grading; includes all work within scope o %bid; Certificate o Occu an issued)' $1,210,000 Private Placement HVAC System Selection of a Lead Design Consultant (including RFP's solicited; "short list' created and interviews held; recommendation ormulated and BOCCa roval Design Process (including programming; schematic design; design development; construction document preparation) Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGC/br review; LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion o %bids; potential timefor rebid; evaluation o %bids and recommendation completed, bid award /contract approval by BOCC contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site preparation ofclearing and grading; includes all work within scope o %bid; Certificate o Occu an issued C, Project Whittted Human Services Center Today's Date 5113198 8:07 Office Renovations 11 $329,100 1Private Placement ; schematic design; design construction document Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGC for review; LGC Bidding Process (including solicitaion of buds; potential time for rebid; evaluation o %bids and recommendation completed; bid award /contract approval by BOCC, contracts written; bonds received; Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid; Old Orange Private Placement 1 Approval /Bond Sale Public Hearing, application to LGC for review; LGC ng Process (including Lion ofbids; potential time for evaluation of bids and mendation completed; bid /contract approval by BOCC, cis written; bonds received, ,s completed: Chair sivns) Lots 11 $150,000 lPrivate Placement ; schematic design; desil construction document Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to L GCfor review; LGC Project Timetable Calendar Year 1998 Calendar Year 1999 Calendar Year 2000 Calendar Year 2001 Ist Quarter an -Mar 2nd Quarter A r- une 3rd Quarter u -S [ 4th Quarter Oct -Dec lit Quarter an -Mar) 2nd Quarter (Apr-June) 3rd Quarter ul -S t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter an - Mar 2nd Quarter A r- une 3rd Quarter ul -S t 4th Quarter Oct -Dec 1st Quarter (Ian-May) 2nd Quarter (Apr-June) 3rd 4th Quarter Quarter my -Se t) Oct Dec) V Project Timetable Project Whittted Human Services Center Today's Date 5113198 8.-07 Calendar Year 1998 Calendar Year 1999 Calendar Year 2000 Calendar Year 2001 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Is[ Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Estimated Cost Funding Source an - Mar A r- une ul -S t Oct -Dec (Ian-Mar) (Apr-June) tu( -S t Oct -Dec an -Mar) A r- une tsl -Se r Oct Dec ) (Ian-Afar) (Apr-June) ul -S t OctUer Bidding Process (including solicicrion of bids.-potential tine for rebid; evaluation of bids, and recommendation completed, bid award /contract approval by BOCC,• contracts written; bonds received, - reviews completed; Chair signs) Construction (including site reparation of Bearing and grading; includes all work within scope of bid; Certificate o Occu an issued Central Recreation and Gymnasium Renovations $220,000 Private Pluemen[ Design Process (including programming; scbem itic design; design development; construction document preparation) Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Prtblic Hearing; application submitted to LGCfor review, LGC approval) Bidding Process (including solicitaion of buds; potential time for rebid, evaluation of buds and recommendation completed; bud award /contract approval by BOCC,• contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed, Chair si ns Construction (including site preparation ofdearing andgrading; includes all work within scope of bul; Ceni f care o Occu an cy issued Estimated Total Project Cost L�$2289 100 00 Project Timetable Project Chapel Hill Senior Center Today's Date # ### #Mdk ### kD Calendar Year 1998 Calendar Year 1999 Calendar Year 2000 Calendar Year 2001 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 4th 2nd 3rd 4th 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter lit Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Ist Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter 1st Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Fundin Source an - Mar (Apr-June) ul - t (Oct-Dec). (Ian-Afar) (Apr-June) ul - t Oct -Dec an - Mar A r- une ul - • [ Oct -Dec (Ian-Mar) (Apr-June) ul -S [ Oct -Dec Site /Land Acquisition (including site selection; owner negotiations; surveys, soil tes4 etc. ) Private Placement Selection of a Lead Design Consultant (including RFP', solicited; 'short list' created and interviews beld; recommendation formulated and BOCC approvalL Design Process (including programming; scbema[icdesign; design development construction document preparation) Private Placement Financing Approval /Bond Sale (including Public Hearing; application submitted to LGCfor review;LGCa roval Approval by Regulatory — Agencies (including Other jurisdiction s Bidding Process (including solicitaion of bids; potential time for rebid; evaluation ofbids and recommendation completed; bid award /contract approval by BOCC; contracts written; bonds received; reviews completed, -Cbairsigns) Construction (including site preparation of clearing and grading; includes all work witbin scope of bid; Certificate o Occu a issued Private Placement Transition following issuance of Certificate of Occupancy (including purchase of furnisbings; departments move to new facility and et set up for operations) Private Placement Open for Business Estimated Total Project Cost 11 S1 800000 kD 1 9a io NINA N 0 MEE MEE To: From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM Orange County Planning & Inspections Department 306F Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 Telephone: (919) 732 -8181 E -mail: dbelk @co.orange.nc.us FAX (919) 644 -3002 John Link, County Manager Donald R. Belk, Planner II/Preservation May 12, 1998 Forsyth County (NC) Farmland Preservation Program Copies: Rod Visser, Assistant County Manager Gene Bell, Acting Planning Director At their May 6 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners asked for information about the farmland preservation program of Forsyth County, NC. The Orange County PACE program guidelines (contained in the "Green Book") are modeled after this program. The Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program is itself modeled upon successful PACE programs in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware. In reference to specific questions by the Board, the following excerpts from the attached program guidelines are provided: • the Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program is funded by the County and administered by the Soil and Water Conservation District (p. 1, Section I.B.); • agricultural conservation easements (development rights) purchased by Forsyth County shall be held in perpetuity (p. 4, Section HI.B.); • repurchase of development rights may be requested after a period of 30 years. The Board of Supervisors shall evaluate the request for repurchase, but the final decision rests with the Board of Commissioners (p. 12 -13, Section VI). /db attachment Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program Guidelines July 1997 12 -L7 i / Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program Guidelines July 1997 12 13 1. 0 loo IV. Forsyth County, North Carolina Farmland Preservation Program Guidelines Table of Contents Introduction page A. General 1 B. Duties and Responsibilities of the Forsyth Soil and Water 1 Conservation District Board of Supervisors (hereinafter referred to as the Board of Supervisors) C. Definition of Development Rights 1 D. Definition of Agricultural Uses 2 E. Definition of Open Space 2 Agricultural Priority Areas (APA) A. General 3 B. Criteria for Designation 3 C. Procedure for Designation and/or Termination 3 D. Protection from Public Capital Projects 3 Purchase of Development Rights A. General 4 B. Description 4 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 4 D. Application Procedure 4 E. Review and Ranking of Applications 4 F. Acquisition 4-5 G. Public Disclosure 6 Lease of Development Rights A. General 7 B. Description 7 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 7 D. Application Procedure 7 E. Review and Ranking of Applications 7 F. Acquisition 7 -9 G. Public Disclosure 9 14 15 ' Table of Contents (Continued) V. Donation of Development Rights A. General 10 B. Description 10 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 10 D. Application Procedure 10 E. Review of Applications 10 F. Acquisition 10 -11 G. Public Disclosure 11 VI. Repurchase of Development Rights A. General 12 B. Eligibility Criteria 12 C. Repurchase Procedure 12 -13 VII. Property Use Restrictions 14 -15 VIII. Farmland Ranking System 16 -21 16 I. Introduction A. General The preservation of Forsyth County's best agricultural land in a manner that directs and accommodates growth and development is a high priority to the residents of Forsyth County. To this end the county establishes the following goals: (1) To protect and conserve those soils in Forsyth County best suited to agricultural uses; (2) To identify and harmonize policies and programs of government at all levels which may conflict with the goal of preservation of farmland; (3) To reduce land use conflicts between agricultural and other land uses; and (4) To promote agriculture as an integral part of the Forsyth County economy. These program guidelines contain policies and procedures for adminis- tering a farmland preservation program. B. Duties and Responsibilities of the Forsvth Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors (hereinafter referred to as the Board of Supervisors The Board of Supervisors shall act on behalf of the county in administering the Farmland Preservation Program. The Board of Supervisors shall select properties for purchase, lease, and/or donation, develop purchase and lease priorities, execute any and all documents necessary to purchase, lease, and/or accept donations of development rights and perform any other such acts necessary for the implementation of this program. The Board of Supervisors shall administer this program within the financial resources provided by the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners. C. Definition of Development Rights For purposes of this program, development rights are defined as: "All right, title, and interest in the use of land for any and all purposes which are not directly and customarily incidental to agricultural or open space uses." D. Definition of Agricultural Uses -For purposes of this program, agricultural uses are defined as: "Agricultural uses include, but are not limited to, the production of crops, trees, horticultural specialties, livestock, and livestock products. Asso- ciated uses allowable are sales and processing necessary and customarily incidental to the agricultural activities on -site which are in keeping with the purpose of the program." E. Definition of Open Space For purposes of this program, open space is defined as: "Open space is land used for recreation, natural resource protection, amenities, and/or bufferyards. Open space may include, but is not limited to, lawns, walkways, active recreation areas, playgrounds, wooded areas, greenways, and water courses. 0 2 17 18 II. Agricultural Priority Areas (APA) A. General The designation of Agricultural Priority Areas in Forsyth County is intended to identify geographic areas containing the most productive agricultural soils. Agricultural Priority Area designation is the first step in directing the expenditure of funds for development rights acquisition. B. Criteria for Designation The following are guidelines for the designation of Agricultural Priority Areas: 1. Areas should contain sufficient contiguous agricultural land to facilitate its permanent agricultural use. 2. Areas should consist primarily of soils identified in Forsyth County as prime or locally important. 3. Land in the area should be primarily in agricultural use. 4. The land should be located outside the area designated by the Forsyth County Comprehensive Plan as the Urban Services Area. C. Procedure for Designation and/or Termination Agricultural Priority Areas will be established by the Board of Super- visors. In determining areas to include, the Board of Supervisors may confer with any governing body affected by the proposed APA, receive recommendations from the City -County Planning Board, and/or conduct a public meeting to receive public comments. The board will establish APA's by resolution and adopt an official map showing boundaries of all APA's. Termination of an APA shall be by resolution approved by the Board of Supervisors. D. Protection from Public Capital Projects Forsyth County will promote, to the extent possible, protection of continued agricultural use of land in APA's from incompatible capital projects that are not planned at the time of APA establishment and which would result in extensive, direct and/or indirect conversion of farmland resources. If possible, no project funded directly or indirectly by the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners will be conducted on land included in an APA if it would lead to the direct conversion of farmland. 3 19 III. Purchase of Development Rights A. General Forsyth County, through the Board of Supervisors, will purchase development rights in agricultural lands. High priority will be given to applicants located within an APA. Applications will be ranked based upon various site factors, such as the level of development pressure and agricultural production capability. Development rights will be purchased in accordance with the ranking of farm properties and the availability of allocated funds. Compensation for development rights will be based on the board's determination of the difference between fair market value and agricultural or open space value appraisals. The purchase price will be subject to negotiation. B. Description The purchase of development rights is legally binding, restricting the owner and future owners to agricultural and/or open space use of the land. The development rights will be held in public trust by Forsyth County in perpetuity. C. Minimum Eligibility Criteri a The agricultural land must be at least ten (10) acres in size or contiguous to a ten (10) acre tract for which the county holds the development rights, and be in agricultural or open space use. D. Application Procedure An application must be submitted to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. E. Review and Ranking of Applications The Board of Supervisors will review and rank each of the applications using the Farmland Ranking System, which is based on the Land Evalua- tion and Site Assessment System developed by the USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. F. Acquisition 1. The Board of Supervisors will obtain two appraisals on tracts considered for entry into the program. One appraisal will establish 4 20 fair market value of the property at its highest and best use. The second appraisal will_ establish the value of the property for agricultural or open space use. 2. Upon receiving the written appraisals, the Board of Supervisors will present the values to the landowner by certified mail. The landowner will have thirty (30) days from receipt of the values to submit an offer to sell his/her development rights. Failure to respond in writing within the required time may constitute waiver of the opportunity, in the sole discretion of the Board of Super- visors. Upon receiving an offer to sell, a representative of the Board of Supervisors will meet with the landowner and accept, reject, or negotiate a compromise price with the landowner. If an agreement is reached, a contract to convey will be signed promptly by the landowner and the Board of Supervisors on behalf of the county. 3. At county expense, the Board of Supervisors will cause any necessary title examinations to be performed and all documen- tation to be prepared. If the property in question is subject to mortgage(s) or lien(s), a subordination agreement or waiver must be secured from the mortgage or lien holder. Closing will not take place until this requirement is met. The Board of Supervisors will assist in securing this agreement with the mortgage or lien holder, at the request of the landowner. 4. Upon preparation of appropriate Iegal documents covering titles, deeds, surveys, and subordination agreements, the closing will be scheduled by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to closing, all legal documents will be reviewed for verification and accuracy. At closing, the owner will execute appropriate full warranty documents conveying development rights to the county in perpetuity. After proper recordation of necessary instruments, the landowner will be presented with a check. The county will bear all closing and related costs. The Board of Supervisors will securely store all pertinent records, including deeds. 5. The Board of Supervisors may extend any stated time limit as circumstances require. The deviations will be reported to the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the landowner. 5 G. Public Disclosure zi During negotiations concerning the purchase of development rights, information will be kept confidential, as allowed by law. Following closing of each purchase, information may be made public as provided by law. M 22 IV. Lease of Development Rights A. General Forsyth County, through the Board of Supervisors, will lease development rights in agricultural lands. High priority will be given to applicants located within an APA. Applications will be ranked based upon various site factors, such as the level of development pressure and agricultural production capability. Development rights will be leased in accordance with the ranking of farm properties and the availability of allocated funds. Compensation for development rights will be based on the board's determination of cash rent values for comparable land. The lease price will be subject to negotiation. The leasing of development rights will be a low priority, used only when insufficient interest in the purchase of development rights exists. B. Description The lease of development rights is legally binding, restricting the owner and future owners to agricultural and/or open space use of the land. The development rights will be held in public trust by Forsyth County. C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria The agricultural land must be at least ten (10) acres in size or contiguous to a ten (10) acie tract for which the county holds the development rights, and be in agricultural or open space use. D. Apmlication Procedure An application must be submitted to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. E. Review and Rankine of Applications The Board of Supervisors will review and rank each of the applications using the Farmland Ranking System, which is based on the Land Evalua- tion and Site Assessment System developed by the USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. F. Acquisition 1. The Board of Supervisors will calculate a maximum cash rent value for each application. A cash rent value factor will be set 7 23 by a committee consisting of the NRCS District Conservationist, the County Extension Director, the County Forester, the Rural Development Manager, and five residents of the county selected by the Board of Supervisors, who derive a majority of their income from agricultural production. The Board of Supervisors will call the meeting of this committee and document the findings. The cash rent value factor will include the lease price per acre for the first year of the lease and the formula for annual payments for the term of the lease. 2. Upon calculating the lease value, the Board of Supervisors will present the value to the landowner by certified mail. The land- owner will have thirty (30) days from receipt of the value to submit an offer to lease his/her development rights. Failure to respond in writing within the required time may constitute waiver of the opportunity, in the sole discretion of the Board of Supervisors. Upon receiving an offer to lease, a representative of the Board of Supervisors will meet with the landowner and accept, reject, or negotiate a compromise price with the landowner. If an agreement is reached, a contract to convey will be signed promptly by the landowner and the Board of supervisors on behalf of the county. At county expense, the Board of Supervisors will cause any necessary title examinations to be performed and all documen- tation to be prepared. If the property in question is subject to mortgage(s) or lien(s), a subordination agreement or waiver must be secured from the mortgage or lien holder. Closing will not take place until this requirement is met. The Board of Supervisors will assist in securing this agreement with the mortgage or lien holder, at the request of the landowner. 4. Upon preparation of appropriate legal documents covering titles, deeds, surveys, and subordination agreements, the closing will be scheduled by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to closing, all legal documents will be reviewed for verification and accuracy. At closing, the owner will execute appropriate full warranty documents conveying development rights to the county in perpetuity. After proper recordation of necessary instruments, the landowner will be presented with a check. The county will bear all closing and related costs. The Board of Supervisors will securely store all pertinent records, including deeds. 8 24 5. The Board of Supervisors may extend any stated time limit as circumstances require. The deviations will be reported to the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the landowner. G. Public Disclosure During negotiations concerning the lease of development rights, information will be kept confidential, as allowed by law. Following closing of each lease, information may be made public as provided by law. Vj V. Donation of Development Rights A. General 25 The Board of Supervisors may accept a voluntary donation or devise of development rights. B. Description The donation of development rights is legally binding, restricting the owner and future owners to agricultural and/or open space use of the land. The development rights will be held in public trust by Forsyth County in perpetuity. C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria The agricultural land must be at least ten (10) acres in size or contiguous to a ten (10) acre tract for which the county holds the development rights, and be in agricultural or open space use. D. Application Procedure An application must be submitted to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. E. Review of Applications The Board of Supervisors will review the applications to determine whether the minimum eligibility criteria are met or whether to waive any of the criteria. F. Acquisition 1. The Board of Supervisors will obtain two appraisals on tracts considered for entry into the program. One appraisal will establish fair market value of the property at its highest and best use. The second appraisal will establish the value of the property for agri- cultural or open space use. 2. Upon receiving the written appraisals, the Board of Supervisors will prepare a donation Verification Statement to document the value of the interest conveyed to the county. This statement will be based on the difference between the appraised values. 10 26 3. At county expense, the Board of Supervisors will cause any necessary title examinations to be performed and all documen- tation to be prepared. If the property in question is subject to mortgages(s) or lien(s), a subordination agreement or waiver must be secured from the mortgage or lien holder. Closing will not take place until this requirement is met. The Board of Supervisors will assist in securing this agreement with the mortgage or lien holder, at the request of the landowner. 4. Upon preparation of appropriate legal documents covering titles, deeds, surveys, and subordination agreements, the closing will be scheduled by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to closing, all legal documents will be reviewed for verification and accuracy. At closing, the owner will execute appropriate full warranty documents conveying development rights to the county in perpetuity. After proper recordation of necessary instruments, the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors will sign and present the Donation Verification Statement to the landowner. The county will bear all closing and related costs. The Board of Supervisors will securely store all pertinent records, including deeds. G. Public Disclosure During negotiations concerning the donation of development rights, information will be kept confidential, as allowed by law. Following closing of each donation, information may be made public as provided by law. 11 27 VI. Repurchase of Development Rights A. General The designation of Agricultural Priority Areas and the subsequent purchase of development rights is intended to create areas with sufficient amounts of contiguous agricultural land to facilitate the permanent agricul- tural use of the land. While program activity will be directed toward that goal, success is dependent on the voluntary participation of landowners. If a landowner or several owners of small tracts are the only participants in their area, the goal may not be achieved. These landowners could become land locked by development and agricultural activity may become impractical. In such a situation it may be in the best interest of the landowner and the public to allow repurchase of the development rights for the property in question. Other circumstances could also affect a property's suitability for continued agricultural use. Repurchase of development rights by a landowner is foreseen as an unusual and infrequent occurrence, and would take place with the concurrence of the Board of Supervisors and the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners. B. Eligibility Criteria In order for a repurchase request to be considered the following criteria must be met: The original purchase of development rights must have occurred at least thirty (30) years prior to the request for repurchase and the development rights must have been purchased by and not donated to the county. C. Repurchase Procedure A landowner requesting a review of his property for possible repurchase of development rights should do so by certified letter to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. The letter should state the reason for the request and the date that the property was entered into the program. The Board of Supervisors will respond by approving the repurchase _ , request in principle (pending successful negotiation of sale price), or by denying the request. Upon approval in principle of the repurchase, the landowner must submit two appraisals of value for the property in question. One 12 28 appraisal will establish the fair market value of the property at its highest and best use. The second appraisal will establish the value of the property for agricultural- or open space use. Other appraisals will be secured as necessary. The Board of Supervisors will review the appraised values and decide to either recommend a repurchase price to the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners or decline to recommend repurchase. If a repurchase price is approved by the Board of Commissioners, the land- owner will be notified by the Board of Supervisors. If the price is acceptable to the landowner, he /she will submit a written offer to purchase the development rights. This offer will be granted by the Board of Supervisors and closing proceedings will begin. The landowner is responsible for promptly securing all legal documents necessary for closing and will bear all associated closing costs. When legal documents are prepared and adequate financing is available a date, time, and location for closing will be agreed upon. Payment for repurchase shall be made directly to the county at closing by a certified check or equivalent. 13 VII. Property Use Restrictions 29 In addition to restrictions set out elsewhere in these guidelines, the following restrictions will apply to property included in the purchase, lease, or donation of development rights program. A waiver of any restriction may be granted only upon approval by the Board of Supervisors in writing. A. Residences permitted on the land from which development rights have been conveyed are existing dwellings and the replacement of existing dwellings. Requests for additional dwellings shall be considered on a case by case basis. At no time shall the maximum number of dwellings on the entire property as initially entered into the program exceed three (3). B. All permitted non - agricultural structures shall, when feasible, be located in the immediate vicinity of existing structures, described as the home- stead or curtilage, as reasonable expansions of the homestead or curtilage or on the area(s) of the property of least productive capability. Such permitted structures shall, when feasible, utilize existing or common driveways, lanes or right of ways. C. The extraction of minerals by surface mining and extraction and removal of topsoil from the property are prohibited. The extraction of subsurface or deep -mined minerals, including natural gas and oil, and the non- commercial extraction of minerals including limestone, shale and other minerals shall be permitted, as long as the removal activity does not significantly diminish the agricultural potential of the land. D. Use of the property for dumping, storage, processing or landfill of non - agricultural solid waste generated off -site is prohibited. E. Use of the property for dumping, storage, processing, or landfill of hazardous or nuclear waste is prohibited. F. Signs, billboard, and outdoor advertising structures may not be displayed on the property except to state the name of the property, the name and address of the occupant, to advertise an on -site activity permitted herein and to advertise the property for sale or rent. G. Agricultural land will be managed in accordance with sound soil and water conservation practices in a manner which will not destroy or substantially or irretrievably diminish the productive capability of the property. 14 30 H. County officials shall have the right to enforce these restrictions by injunction and all other appropriate proceedings allowable by law. Representatives of the county-may enter upon the property for the purposes of inspection concerning compliance with the Farmland Preservation Program. The county will hold the development rights in public trust for farmland preservation purposes and will not voluntarily assign these rights except to another organization bound to hold such rights for the same purposes. J. All tracts of land from which development rights were purchased with Federal or State funds will be subject to Federal and State regulations concerning farmland preservation. 15 VIII. Farmland Ranking System 31 The Farmland Ranking System will be used to rank, or prioritize, applications received from landowners seeking sale or donation of their development rights. The system can also be used for evaluating conversion impact. The system consists of two parts: Site Assessment Criteria: This part of the system consists of 10 factors, most of which are related to development pressures and development capability /suitability of a particular farm parcel and its surrounding area. Each factor is assigned a point value based on its relative importance to other factors. 2. - Soil Assessment Criteria: All soils in Forsyth County have been rated and placed into groups ranging from the most productive farmland to the least productive. A relative value has been determined for each group — the best group is assigned the highest value and all other groups are assigned lower values. To determine the total value of a given parcel, the values for the Soil Assessment and Site Assessment criteria are added together. Site Assessment Criteria The following information describes the criteria to be used in site evaluation in administering the Farmland Preservation Program. Point values and the criteria for allocation of ranking points are listed below. 1. Farm Size (weight - 100 Points) A score of one point per acre is given up to a maximum of 100 points. 2. Percentage of Farm in Agricultural Use (weight - 100 points) A score of one ranking point per percentage point of land in production compared to total farm size is given up to maximum of 100 points. 16 3 - 5. 32 Proximity to Public Water and Sewer (weight - 100 points) Existing service area adjacent 100 points Existing service area within `/4 mile 80 points Planned service area within `/4 mile 70 points Existing service area within `/z mile 60 points Planned service area within V2 mile 50 points Existing or planned service area within 1 mile radius 30 points No existing or planned service area within 1 mile radius 10 points Probability of Conversion (weight - 100 points) Property subject to potential forced sale 100 points Property subject to estate settlement sale 75 points Property actively marketed for voluntary sale 50 points Proximity to Planned Development (weight - 50 points) Non - Agricultural development planned adjacent 50 points Non - Agricultural development planned within' /4 mile 40 points Non - Agricultural development planned within % mile 30 points Non - Agricultural development planned within 1 mile 20 points Planned agriculture within 1 mile 10 points Proximity to Agricultural Priority Areas (APA) (weight - 50 points) Included in or adjacent to APA 50 points Within %4 mile 40 points '/4 to %z mile 30 points More than %s mile 20 points 7. Capital Investment in Farm Operation (weight - 200 Points) (Dwellings are not included in this determination other than employee housing.) Substantial capital investment within past 5 years 200 points Substantial capital investment within past 10 year 100 points Substantial capital investment within past 15 years 50 points 8. Conservation Program (weight - 200 points) A score of two ranking points per percentage point of land meeting the "T" formula of conservation is given up to a maximum of 200 points. 17 33 9. Historic, Scenic, Environmental Qualities (weight - 50 points) - Exceptional features favorable to preservation (National Register of Historic Places, exception scenic contribution on major highway corridor, exceptional or special environmental circumstances) 50 points Significant features favorable to preservation (Historic Site Survey, significant scenic contribution of rural roads, significant environmental circumstances.) 40 points Features favorable to preservation (Significant, but undocumented historic features, moderate localized scenic contribution and/or limited but recognized environmental features favorable to preservation) 30 points 10. Specialty Products (weight - 50 points) A score of one -half a ranking point per percentage point of land used for production of a locally unique crop or product up to a maximum of 50 points. 50 points 18 34 Soil Assessment Criteria The following tables list the soil types found in Forsyth County with the pertinent characteristics, groupings, relative values and ranking system points. This information is used to determine the relative soil quality of a given parcel of land by the administration of the Farmland Preservation Program. Land Ranking Map Soil Cap Farmland Agricultural Relative System Svmbol Series Slope Subclass Class Group Value Points A1B Altavista 1 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 ApB Appling 2 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 CcB Cecil 2 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 HiB Hiwassee 2 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 MaB Madison 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 MeB - Mecklenburg 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 PaB Pacolet 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 WdB Wedowee 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 WkB Wickham 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 VaB Vance 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 ApC Appling 6 -10 3E Prime 2 .86 602 WkC Wickham 6 -10 3E Prime 2 .86 602 HmB2 Hiwassee 2-6 3E Prime 2 .86 602 EnB Enon 2 -6 2E State & Local 3 .76 532 f CeB2 Cecil 2 -6 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 CcC Cecil 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 HiC Hiwassee 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 MaC Madison 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 MeC Mecklenburg 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 Co Congaree 0 -2 2W State & Local 4 .72 504 Ch Chewacla 0 -2 3W State & Local 4 .72 504 Wh Wehadkee 0 -2 4W State & Local 4 .72 504 PcB2 Pacolet 2 -6 3E State & Local 5 .64 448 McB2 Madison 2-6 3E State & Local 5 .64 448 PaC Pacolet 6 -10 3E State & Local 5 .64 448 CeC2 Cecil 6 -10 4E State & Local 5 .64 448 HmC2 Hiwassee 6 -10 4E State & Local 5 .64 448 McC2 Madison 6 -10 4E State & Local 5 .64 448 19 35 20 Land Ranking Map Soil Cap Farmland Agricultural Relative System Svmbol Series Slope Subclass _. Class Group Value Points IrB Iredell 2 -6 2E Other 6 .61 427 WeB Wedowee - 2 -6 3E Other 6 .61 427 Louisburg EnC Enon 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 WeC Wedowee- 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 Louisburg WdC Wedowee 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 VaC Vance 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 CcD Cecil 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 HiD Hiwassee 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 MaD Madison 10 -15. 4E Other 7 .53 371 MeD Mecklenburg 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 PaD Pacolet 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 WdD Wedowee 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 WkD Wickham 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 HmD2 Hiwassee 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 WiC Wilkes 6 -10 4E Other 8 .43 301 PcC2 Pacolet 6 -10 4E Other 8 .43 301 EnD Enon 10 -15 4E Other 8 .43 301 VaD Vance 10 -15 4E Other 8 .43 301 WeD Wedowee 10 -15 4E Other 8 .43 301 Louisburg PcC3 Pacolet 6 -10 6E Other 9 .23 161 LoD Louisburg 6 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 TaD Tallapoosa 6 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 WiD Wilkes 10 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 McD2 Madison 10 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 PcD2 Pacolet 10 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 HiE Hiwassee 15 -25 6E Other 9 .23 161 LwE Louisburg- 15 -25 6E Other 9 .23 161 Wedowee MaF Madison 15-45 6E Other 9 .23 161 PaF Pacolet . 15-45 6E Other 9 .23 1'61 20 Map Svmbol. PeE3 LoF TaF WiF PcF Cu Gu PuC PuE 36 Land Pacolet - Urban 10 -25 -- Other 11 0 0 Land 21 Land Ranking Soil Cap -- Farmland Agricultural Relative System Series Slope Subclass Class Group Value Points Pacolet 10 -25 7E Other 10 .09 63 Louisburg 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 Tallapoosa 15 -45 7E Other 10 .09 63 Wilkes 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 Pacolet 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 Cut & Fill Land -- — Other 11 0 0 Gullied Land -- -- Other 11 0 0 Pacolet - Urban 2 -10 -- Other 11 0 0 Land Pacolet - Urban 10 -25 -- Other 11 0 0 Land 21 37 M E M O R A N D U M Orange County Planning & Inspections Department 306F Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 Telephone: (919) 732 -8181 E -mail: dbelk @co.orange.nc.us FAX (919) 644 -3002 To: Rod Visser, Assistant County Manager From: Donald R. Belk, Planner II/Preservation Date: May 12, 1998 Subject: Summary on Cost of Community Services (COCS) Studies Copies: John Link, County Manager Gene Bell, Acting Planning Director At the BOCC meeting of May 6, Dolly Hunter, chair of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, stated that a comparison of the costs and benefits of farmland preservation versus the provision of county services to developed land is essential for public support of a PACE program. A number of studies, known as cost of community services (COCS) studies, have been completed in several places where farmland preservation is an important issue. These studies consistently show that farmland preservation pays for itself in the long run. Since its need for services is low compared to residential development, preserved farmland has a positive impact on tax revenues, generating more in taxes than it demands in public services. Attached is a summary from the Farmland Information Library I that briefly describes the methodology, function, and purpose of a COCS study. In 1994, an abbreviated analysis of COCS in Orange County was prepared for the "Green Book ". This cursory examination used the fiscal impact analysis template developed by the Planning Department to examine the effects of converting a 125 -acre farm to 58 residential lots. This abbreviated analysis showed that for every dollar of tax revenue raised by this development, Orange County spent an extra $0.34 in direct services (1 : 1.34). For the 125 acre farm, the ratio was 1 : 0.61; e.g., for every dollar of tax revenue raised by the farm, only $0.61 in expenditures was required for services - a net gain of $0.39. While these results should not be construed as equivalent to the detailed COCS studies conducted at other locations, they may serve to verify other findings that farmland preservation is indeed a fiscally responsible endeavor. /db attachment 1 The Farmland Information Library is a part of the Farmland Information Center: a project of American Farmland Trust Center for Agriculture in the Environment; funded by USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service in affiliation with the USDA National Agricultural Library. Farmland Information Center - Tech ... Cost of Community Services Studies http: / / farm. tic.niu.edwfic -ta tafs-cocs. htm I AMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST • FARMLAND INFORMATION CENTER 38 COST OF DESCRIPTION COMMUNITY Cost of Community Services - studies are an inexpensive, easy -to- understand SERVICES way to determine the net fiscal contribution of different land uses to local STUDIES budgets. Municipal records are reorganized to assign the cost of local public services to farms, forests and open lands, as well as residential, commercial and industrial lands. The result is a set of ratios that compare the annual income to the annual expenditures for different land uses. COCS studies are a snapshot in time of costs versus revenues for each type of /ARNLANO TNFOANATTON CENTER land use. They do not predict future costs or revenues or the impact of future 11411VN: growth. They do provide a baseline of current information to help local officials and citizens mak a informed land use and policy decisions. METHODOLOGY Fact Sheet COCS studies involve five basic steps: 1. Define the scope of the project and identify land use categories to study (e.g., residential, commercial, industrial, farm and forest land). - 2. Collect data on local revenues and expenditures. 3. Group revenues and allocate them to the land use categories identified in step 1. 4. Group expenditures and allocate them to the land use categories identified in step 1. 5. Analyze the data and calculate revenue -to- expenditure ratios for each land use category. The process is straightforward, although ensuring reliable figures requires the assistance of local officials and service providers. The most complicated task is interpreting existing records to reflect COCS land use categories. Allocating revenues and expenses requires a significant amount of research, including extensive personal interviews. HISTORY Communities often evaluate the impact of growth on local budgets by conducting or commissioning fiscal impact analyses. Fiscal impact studies project public costs and revenues from different land development patterns. They generally show that residential development is a net fiscal loss for communities and recommend commercial and industrial development as a strategy to balance local budgets. Rural towns and counties that are likely to benefit most from the information provided by fiscal impact analyses rarely have the expertise or resources to conduct a study, which tend to be expensive. Also, these studies rarely consider the fiscal contribution of farm, forest and recreational lands, which' are very important to rural economies. American Farmland Trust developed COCS studies in the mid -1980s to give communities a simple, inexpensive method of evaluating the contribution of farm, forest and ranch lands to the local tax base. COCS studies have been conducted in at least 40 communities in the Northeast and Midwest. 1 of 5 5/11/98 3:12 PM 'rarmlana tntormation (,enter - lecn ... ( -ost of (,ommunfry -)ervices 3tuaies nap:;; farm. nc.nfu.eawtic- taatafs- cocs.html 39 FUNCTIONS & PURPOSES Communities pay a high price for unplanned growth. Scattered development frequently causes traffic congestion, air and water pollution, loss of open space and increased demand for costly public services. This is why it is important for citizens and commun ity leaders to understand the relationships between residential and commercial growth, land conservation and their municipality's bottom line. COCS studies can help local officials and farmland protection advocates counter three claims that are commonly heard at local meetings in rural or suburban communities: 1. Residential development will lower property taxes by increasing the tax base; 2. Farmland gets an unfair tax break when it is assessed at its actual use for agriculture instead of its potential use for development; 3. Open lands, including productive farms and forests, are interim uses just waiting to be developed to their "highest and best use." While it is true that an acre of land with a new house generates more total revenue than an acre of hay or corn, this tells us little about a community's fiscal stability. In areas where farming and forestry are major industries, it is especially importan t to consider the real property tax contribution of privately owned natural resource lands. Farms, forests and other open lands may generate less revenue than residential, commercial or industrial properties, but they require little public infrastructure and few services. COCS studies conducted in more than 40 communities over the past decade show that owners of farm, forest and open lands pay more in local tax revenues than it costs local government to provide services to their properties. Residential land uses, in contra st, are a net drain on municipal coffers: It costs local governments more to provide services to homeowners than residential landowners pay in property taxes. $1.25 $1.00 S .75 S .50 S .25 I industrial rau�uru�cs� """d Graph: Median cost per dollar of revenue raised -to provide public services to different land uses The findings of COCS studies are consistent with those of conventional fiscal impact analyses, which document the high cost of residential development and recommend commercial and industrial development to help balance local budgets. What is unique about COCS studies is that they show that that agricultural land is similar to other commercial and industrial uses. In every community studied, farmland has generated a fiscal surplus to help offset the 2 of 5 5/11/98 3:12 PM Farmland Information Center - Tech ... Cost of Community Services Studies http:,itarm.fic.niu.eclw tic- taitats- cocs.ntml shortfall created by residential demand for public services. This is true even 40 when the land is assessed at its current, agricultural use. Communities need reliable information to help them see the full picture of their land uses. COCS studies are an inexpensive way to evaluate the net contribution of farm and open lands. They can help local leaders discard the notion that natural resources must be converted to other uses to ensure fiscal stability. They also dispel the myths that residential development leads to lower taxes, that differential assessment programs give landowners an unfair tax break, and that farmland is just waiting around f or development. One type of land use is not intrinsically better than another, and COCS studies do not judge the overall public good or long -term merits of any land use or taxing structure. Communities must balance goals such as maintaining affordable housing, creating j obs and conserving land and resources. With good planning, these goals can complement rather than compete with each other. COCS studies give communities another tool to make decisions about their futures. The Farmland Information Center is a public /private partnership between American Farmland Trust and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service that provides technical information about farmland protection. American Farmland Trust works to stop the loss of productive farmland and to promote farming practices that lead to a healthy environment. American Faand Trust SUMMARY OF COSTS OF COMMUNITY SERVICES STUDIES, REVENUE -TO- EXPENDITURE RATIOS IN DOLLARS State/Town Residential Combined Farm /Forest Source including Commercial Open Land farm & Industrial house Connecticut Durham 1 : 1.07 1 : 0.27 1 : 0.23 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 Farmington 1 :1.33 1 : 0.32 1 :0.31 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 Hebron 1 : 1.06 1 : 0.47 1 :0.43 American Farmland Trust, 1986 Litchfield 1 :1.11 1 : 0.34 1 :0.34 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 Pomfret 1 : 1.06 1 : 0.27 1 :0.86 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 Maine Bethel 1:1.29 1 : 0.425 1 : 0.06 Thomas Good, Antioch New England Graduate School, 1994 Maryland Carroll County 1 : 1.15 1: 0.48 1 :0.45 Carroll County Dept. of Management & Budget, 1994 of 5 5/11/98 3:12 PM dCIIIli ilU L111VIII1 dL1Ut1 L.CllIGi - 1 CI:II...I.W� vi L.vuuuwu�y JC1 � ��c� .�wuic� Frederick County Massachusetts Agawam Becket Deerfield Franklin Gill Leverett Westford Williamstown Minnesota Farmington Lake Elmo Independence New York Amenia Beekman Farmington Dix Fishkill Hector Kinderhook Montour Northeast Reading Red Hook Ohio Madison Village Madison Township Pennsylvania Bethel Township Carroll Township Straban Township Rhode Island Hopkinton Little Compton 1 :1.05 1 :0.39 llltp.�i icu iu.ii�.uiu.CU W[1C- C3�C3IS-%OCS.11Ci'A! 1 : 0.48 American Farmland Trust, 1997 1 41 1 : 1.05 1 :0.44 1 : 0.31 American Farmland Trust, 1992 1 : 1.02 1 : 0.83 -1: 0.72 Southern New England Forest 1 :1.04 1 :0.19 1 : 0.47 Consortium, 1995 1 :1.16 1 : 0.38 1 : 0.29 American Farmland Trust, 1992 1 :1.02 1 : 0.58 1 : 0.40 Southern New England Forest 1 :1.22 1 : 0.27 1 : 0.72 Consortium, 1995 1 :1.15 1 : 0.43 1 : 0.38 American Farmland Trust, 1992 1 :1.15 1 : 0.29 1 : 0.25 Southern New England Forest 1 :1.23 1 : 0.31 1 : 0.74 Consortium, 1995 1 :1.15 1 : 0.53 1 : 0.39 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 1 :1.11 1 : 0.40 1 : 0.34 Hazler et al., 1992 1 :1.02 1 : 0.18 1 : 0.48 American Farmland Trust, 1994 1 :1.07 1 : 0.20 1 : 0.27 American Farmland Trust, 1994 1 :1.04 1 :0.19 1 : 0.47 American Farmland Trust, 1994 1 :1.23 1 :0.17 1 :0.25 Bucknall, 1989 1 :1.12 1 : 0.18 1 : 0.48 American Farmland Trust, 1989 1 :1.22 1 : 0.27 1 : 0.72 Kinsman et al., 1991 1 :1.51 1 : 0.27 1 : 0.31 Schuyler County League of Women Voters, 1993 1 :1.23 1 : 0.31 1 : 0.74 Bucknall, 1989 1 :1.30 1 : 0.15 1 : 0.28 Schuyler County League of Women Voters, 1993 1 : 1.05 1: 0.21 1 : 0.17 Concerned Citizens of Kinderhook, 1996 1 :1.50 1 : 0.28 1 : 0.29 Schuyler County League of Women Voters, 1992 1 :1.36 1: 0.29 1 : 0.21 American Farmland Trust, 1989 1 :1.08 1 :0.26 1 : 0.32 Schuyler County League of Women Voters, 1992 1 :1.11 1 : 0.20 1 : 0.22 Bucknall, 1989 1 :1.67 1 :0.20 1 : 0.38 AFT and Lake County Ohio SWCD, 1993 1 :1.40 1 :0.25 1 : 0.30 AFT and Lake County Ohio SWCD, 1993 1 :1.08 1 : 0.17 1 : 0.06 Tim Kelsey, 1992 1 : 1.03 1 :0.03 1 : 0.02 Tim Kelsey, 1992 1 :1.10 1 : 0.11 1 : 0.06 Tim Kelsey, 1992 1 :1.08 1 :0.31 1 : -0.31 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 1 :1.05 1 :0.56 1 : 0.37 Southern New England Forest 4 of5 5/11/98 3:12 PM land Infocmation Center - Tech ... Cost of Community Services Studies http: / /farm.fic.niu.edu/fic- ta/tafs- cocs.html Consortium, 1995 42 West Greenwich 1 : 1.46 1 : 0.40 1 : 0.46 Southern New England Forest Consortium, 1995 Virginia Clarke County 1:1.26 1:0.21 1:0.15 Piedmont Environ. Council, Clarke j County, Virginia, 1984 Wisconsin * Dunn 1 : 1.06 1 : 0.29 1 : 0.18 Town of Dunn. 1994 ' iM 2! American Fapwdand Trust 43 MEMORANDUM Orange County Planning & Inspections Department 306F Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 Telephone: (919) 732 -8181 E -mail: dbelk @co.orange.nc.us To: John Link, County Manager From: Donald R. Belk, Planner II/Preservation 45�i& Date: May 12, 1998 Subject: Forsyth County (NC) Farmland Preservation Program Copies: _ R ss ;: suet Cotmty Manages Gene Bell, Acting Planning Director FAX (919) 644 -3002 At their May 6 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners asked for information about the farmland preservation program of Forsyth County, NC. The Orange County PACE program guidelines (contained in the "Green Book ") are modeled after this program. The Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program is itself modeled upon successful PACE programs in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Delaware. In reference to specific questions by the Board, the following excerpts from the attached program guidelines are provided: • the Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program is funded by the County and administered by the Soil and Water Conservation District (p. 1, Section I.B.); • agricultural conservation easements (development rights) purchased by Forsyth County shall be held in perpetuity (p. 4, Section III.B.); • repurchase of development rights may be requested after a period of 30 years. The Board of Supervisors shall evaluate the request for repurchase, but the final decision rests with the Board of Commissioners (p. 12 -13, Section VI). /db attachment 45 Forsyth County Farmland Preservation Program Guidelines July 1997 46 47 Forsyth County, North- Carolina Farmland Preservation Program Guidelines Table of Contents I. Introduction Paae A. General 1 B. Duties and Responsibilities of the Forsyth Soil and Water 1 Conservation District Board of Supervisors (hereinafter referred to as the Board of Supervisors) C. Definition of Development Rights 1 D. Definition of Agricultural Uses 2 E. Definition of Open Space 2 II. Agricultural Priority Areas (APA) A. General 3 B. Criteria for Designation 3 C. Procedure for Designation and/or Termination 3 D. Protection from Public Capital Projects 3 M. Purchase of Development Rights A. General 4 B. Description 4 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 4 D. Application Procedure 4 E. Review and Ranking of Applications 4 F. Acquisition 4-5 G. Public Disclosure 6 IV. Lease of Development Rights A. General 7 B. Description 7 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 7 D. Application Procedure 7 E. Review and Ranking of Applications 7 F. Acquisition 7"9 G. Public Disclosure 9 48 Table of Contents (Continued) V. Donation of Development Rights A. General 10 B. Description 10 C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria 10 D. Application Procedure 10 E. Review of Applications 10 F. Acquisition 10 -11 G. Public Disclosure 11 VI. Repurchase of Development Rights A. General 12 B.- Eligibility Criteria 12 C. Repurchase Procedure 12 -13 VII. Property Use Restrictions 1415 VIII. Farmland Ranking System 16 -21 49 I. Introduction A., - , General The preservation of Forsyth County's best agricultural land in a manner that directs and accommodates growth and development is a high priority to the residents of Forsyth County. To this end the county establishes the following goals: (1) To protect and conserve those soils in Forsyth County best suited to agricultural uses; (2) To identify and harmonize policies and programs of government at all levels which may conflict with the goal of preservation of farmland; (3) To reduce land use conflicts between agricultural and other land uses; and (4) To promote agriculture as an integral part of the Forsyth County economy. These program guidelines contain policies and procedures for adminis- tering a farmland preservation program. B. Duties and Responsibilities of the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Board of Supervisors (hereinafter referred to as the Board of Supervisors The Board of Supervisors shall act on behalf of the county in administering the Farmland Preservation Program. The Board of Supervisors shall select properties for purchase, lease, and/or donation, develop purchase and lease priorities, execute any and all documents necessary to purchase, lease, and/or accept donations of development rights and perform any other suer acts necessary for the implementation of this program. The Board of Supervisors shall administer this program within the financial resources provided by the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners. C. Definition of Development Rights For purposes of this program, development rights are defined as: "All right, title, and interest in the use of land for any and all purposes which are not directly and customarily incidental to agricultural or open space uses." 50 D. Definition of Agricultural Uses For purposes of this program, agricultural uses are defined as: "Agricultural uses include, but are not limited to, the production of crops, trees, horticultural specialties, livestock, and livestock products. Asso- ciated uses allowable are sales and processing necessary and customarily incidental to the agricultural activities on -site which are in keeping with the purpose of the program." E. Definition of Open Space For purposes of this program, open space is defined as: "Open space is land used for recreation, natural resource protection, amenities, and/or btifferyards. Open space may include, but is not limited to, lawns, walkways, active recreation areas, playgrounds, wooded areas, greenways, and water courses. 2 51 II. Agricultural Priority Areas (APA) A. General -_ The designation of Agricultural Priority Areas in Forsyth County is intended to identify geographic areas containing the most productive agricultural soils. Agricultural Priority Area designation is the first step in directing the expenditure of funds for development rights acquisition. B. Criteria for Designation The following are guidelines for the designation of Agricultural Priority Areas: 1. Areas should contain sufficient contiguous agricultural land to facilitate its permanent agricultural use. 2. Areas should consist primarily of soils identified in Forsyth County as prime or locally important. 3. Land in the area should be primarily in agricultural use. 4. The land should be located outside the area designated by the Forsyth County Comprehensive Plan as the Urban Services Area. C. Procedure for Designation and/or Termination Agricultural Priority Areas will be established by the Board of Super- visors. In determining areas to include, the Board of Supervisors may confer with any governing body affected by the proposed APA, receive recommendations from the City - County Planning Board, and/or conduct a public meeting to receive public comments. The board will establish APA's by resolution and adopt an official map showing boundaries of all APA's. Termination of an APA shall be by resolution approved by the Board of Supervisors. D. Protection from Public Capital Projects Forsyth County will promote, to the extent possible, protection of continued agricultural use of laird in APR's from incompatible capital projects that are not planned at the time of APA establishment and which would result in extensive, direct and/or indirect conversion of farmland resources. If possible, no project funded directly or indirectly by the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners will be conducted on land included in an APA if it would lead to the direct conversion of farmland. 52 III. Purchase of Development Rights A. _General Forsyth County, through the Board of Supervisors, will purchase development rights in agricultural lands. High priority will be given to applicants located within an APA. Applications will be ranked based upon various site factors, such as the level of development pressure and agricultural production capability. Development rights will be purchased in accordance with the ranking of farm properties and the availability of allocated funds. Compensation for development rights will be based on the board's determination of the difference between fair market value and agricultural or open space value appraisals. The purchase price will be subject to negotiation. B. Description The purchase of development rights is legally binding, restricting the owner and future owners to agricultural and/or open space use of the land. The development rights will be held in public trust by Forsyth County in perpetuity. C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria The agricultural land must be at least ten (10) acres in size or contiguous to a ten (10) acre tract for which the county holds the development rights, and be in agricultural or open space use. D. Application Procedure An application must be submitted to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. E. Review and Ranking of Applications The Board of Supervisors will review and rank each of the applications using the Farmland Ranking System, which is based on the Land Evalua- tion and Site Assessment System developed by the USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. F. Acquisition 1. The Board of Supervisors will obtain two appraisals on tracts considered for entry into the program. One appraisal will establish 4 53 fair market value of the property at its highest and best use. The second appraisal will establish the value of the property for agricultural or open space use. 2. Upon receiving the written appraisals, the Board of Supervisors will present the values to the landowner by certified mail. The landowner will have thirty (30) days from receipt of the values to submit an offer to sell his/her development rights. Failure to respond in writing within the required time may constitute waiver of the opportunity, in the sole discretion of the Board of Super- visors. Upon receiving an offer to sell, a representative of the Board of Supervisors will meet with the landowner and accept, reject, or negotiate a compromise price with the landowner. If an agreement is reached, a contract to convey will be signed promptly by the landowner and the Board of Supervisors on behalf of the county. 3. At county expense, the Board of Supervisors will cause any necessary title examinations to be performed and all documen- tation to be prepared. If the property in question is subject to mortgage(s) or lien(s), a subordination agreement or waiver must be secured from the mortgage or lien holder. Closing will not take place until this requirement is met. The Board of Supervisors will assist in securing this agreement with the mortgage or lien holder, at the request of the landowner. 4. Upon preparation of appropriate legal documents covering titles, deeds, surveys, and subordination agreements, the closing will be scheduled by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to closing, all legal documents will be reviewed for verification and accuracy. At closing, the owner will execute appropriate full warranty documents conveying development rights to the county in perpetuity. After proper recordation of necessary instruments, the landowner will be presented with a check. The county will bear all closing and related costs. The Board of Supervisors will securely store all pertinent records, including deeds. 5. The Board of Supervisors may extend any stated time limit as circumstances require. The deviations will be reported to the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the landowner. W G. Public Disclosure 54 During negotiations concerning the purchase of development rights, information will be kept confidential, as allowed by law. Following closing of each purchase, information may be made public as provided by law. 55 TV. Lease of Development Rights A. General Forsyth County, through the Board of Supervisors, will lease development rights in agricultural lands. High priority will be given to applicants located within an APA. Applications will be ranked based upon various site factors, such as the level of development pressure and agricultural production capability. Development rights will be leased in accordance with the ranking of farm properties and the availability of allocated funds. Compensation for development rights will be based on the board's determination of cash rent values for comparable land. The lease price will be subject to negotiation. The leasing of development rights will be a low priority, used only when insufficient interest in the purchase of development rights exists. - B. Description The lease of development rights is legally binding, restricting the owner and future owners to agricultural and/or open space use of the land. The development rights will be held in public trust by Forsyth County. C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria The agricultural land must be at least ten (10) acres in size or contiguous to a ten (10) acre tract for which the county holds the development rights, and be in agricultural or open space use. D. Ar)olication Procedure An application must be submitted to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. E. Review and Ranking of Applications The Board of Supervisors will review and rank each of the applications using the Farmland Ranking System, which is based on the Land Evalua- tion and Site Assessment System developed by the USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service. F. Acquisition 1. The Board of Supervisors will calculate a maximum cash rent value for each application. A cash rent value factor will be set .7 56 by a committee consisting of the NRCS District Conservationist, the County Extension Director, the County Forester, the Rural Development Manager, and five residents of the county selected by the Board of Supervisors, who derive a majority of their income from agricultural production. The Board of Supervisors will call the meeting of this committee and document the findings. The cash rent value factor will include the lease price per acre for the first year of the lease and the formula for annual payments for the term of the lease. 2. Upon calculating the lease value, the Board of Supervisors will present the value to the landowner by certified mail. The land- owner will have thirty (30) days from receipt of the value to submit an offer to lease his/her development rights. Failure to respond in writing within the required time may constitute waiver of the opportunity, in the sole discretion of the Board of Supervisors. Upon receiving an offer to lease, a representative of the Board of Supervisors will meet with the landowner and accept, reject, or negotiate a tompromise price with the landowner. If an agreement is reached, a contract to convey will be signed promptly by the landowner and the Board of supervisors on behalf of the county. 3. At county expense, the Board of Supervisors will cause any necessary title examinations to be performed and all documen- tation to be prepared. If the property in question is subject to mortgage(s) or lien(s), a subordination agreement or waiver must be secured from the mortgage or lien holder. Closing will not take place until this requirement is met. The Board of Supervisors will assist in securing this agreement with the mortgage or lien holder, at the request of the landowner. 4. Upon preparation of appropriate legal documents covering titles, deeds, surveys, and subordination agreements, the closing will be scheduled by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to closing, all legal documents will be reviewed for verification and accuracy. At closing, the owner will execute appropriate full warranty documents conveying development rights to the county in perpetuity. After proper recordation of necessary instruments, the landowner will be presented with a check_ The county will bear all closing and related costs. The Board of Supervisors will securely store all pertinent records, including deeds. 57 5. The Board of Supervisors may extend any stated time limit as circumstances require. The deviations will be reported to the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the landowner. G. Public Disclosure During negotiations concerning the lease of development rights, information will be kept confidential, as allowed by law. Following closing of each lease, information may be made public as provided by law. D 58 V. Donation of Development Rights A. General The Board of Supervisors may accept a voluntary donation or devise of development rights. B. Description The donation of development rights is legally binding, restricting the owner and future owners to agricultural and/or open space use of the land. The development rights will be held in public trust by Forsyth County in perpetuity. C. Minimum Eligibility Criteria The agricultural land must be at least ten (10) acres in size or contiguous to a ten (10) acre tract for which the county holds the development rights, and be in agricultural or open space use. D. Application Procedure An application must be submitted to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. E. Review of Applications The Board of Supervisors will review the applications to determine whether the minimum eligibility criteria are met or whether to waive any of the criteria. F. Acquisition 1. The Board of Supervisors will obtain two appraisals on tracts considered for entry into the program. One appraisal will establish fair market value of the property at its highest and best use. The second appraisal will establish the value of the property for agri- cultural or open space use. 2. Upon receiving the written appraisals, the Board of Supervisors will prepare a donation Verification Statement to document the value of the interest conveyed to the county. This statement will be based on the difference between the appraised values. 10 59 3. At county expense, the Board of Supervisors will cause any necessary title examinations to be performed and all documen- tation to be prepared. -If the property in question is subject to mortgages(s) or lien(s), a subordination agreement or waiver must be secured from the mortgage or lien holder. Closing will not take place until this requirement is met. The Board of Supervisors will assist in securing this agreement with the mortgage or lien holder, at the request of the landowner. 4. Upon preparation of appropriate legal documents covering titles, deeds, surveys, and subordination agreements, the closing will be scheduled by the Board of Supervisors. Prior to closing, all legal documents will be reviewed for verification and accuracy. At closing, the owner will execute appropriate full warranty documents conveying development rights to the county in perpetuity. After proper recordation of necessary instruments, the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors will sign and present the Donation Verification Statement to the landowner. The county will bear all closing and related costs. The Board of Supervisors will securely store all pertinent records, including deeds. G. Public Disclosure During negotiations concerning the donation of development rights, information will be kept confidential, as allowed by law. Following closing of each donation, information may be made public as provided by law. 11 60 VI. Repurchase of Development Rights A. General The designation of Agricultural Priority Areas and the subsequent purchase of development rights is intended to create areas with sufficient amounts of contiguous agricultural land to facilitate the permanent agricul- tural use of the land. While program activity will be directed toward that goal, success is dependent on the voluntary participation of landowners. If a landowner or several owners of small tracts are the only participants in their area, the goal may not be achieved. These landowners could become land locked by development and agricultural activity may become impractical. In such a situation it may be in the best interest of the landowner and the public to allow repurchase of the development rights for the property in question. Other circumstances could also affect a property's suitability for continued agricultural use. Repurchase of development rights by a landowner is foreseen as an unusual and infrequent occurrence, and would take place with the concurrence of the Board of Supervisors and the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners. B. Eligibilitv Criteria In order for a repurchase request to be considered the following criteria must be met: The original purchase of development rights must have occurred at least thirty (30) years prior to the request for repurchase and the development rights must have been purchased by and not donated to the county. C. Repurchase Procedure A landowner requesting a review of his property for possible repurchase of development rights should do so by certified letter to the Forsyth Soil and Water Conservation District Office. The letter should state the reason for the request and the date that the property was entered into the program. The Board of Supervisors will respond by approving the repurchase request in principle (pending successful negotiation *of sale price), or by denying the request. Upon approval in principle of the repurchase, the landowner must submit two appraisals of value for the property in question. One 12 61 appraisal will establish the fair market value of the property at its highest and best use. The second appraisal will establish the value of the property for agricultural- or open space use. Other appraisals will be secured as necessary. The Board of Supervisors will review the appraised values and decide to either recommend a repurchase price to the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners or decline to recommend repurchase. If a repurchase price is approved by the Board of Commissioners, the land- owner will be notified by the Board of Supervisors. If the price is acceptable to the landowner, he/she will submit a written offer to purchase the development rights. This offer will be granted by the Board of Supervisors and closing proceedings will begin. The landowner is responsible for promptly securing all legal documents necessary for closing and will bear all associated closing costs. When legal documents are prepared and adequate financing is available a date, time, and location for closing will be agreed upon. Payment for repurchase shall be made directly to the county at closing by a certified check or equivalent. 13 VII. Property Use Restrictions 62 In addition to restrictions set out elsewhere in these guidelines, the following restrictions will apply to property included in the purchase, lease, or donation of development rights program. A waiver of any restriction may be granted only upon approval by the Board of Supervisors in writing. A. Residences permitted on the land from which development rights have been conveyed are existing dwellings and the replacement of existing dwellings. Requests for additional dwellings shall be considered on a case by case basis. At no time shall the maximum number of dwellings on the entire property as initially entered into the program exceed three (3). B. All permitted non - agricultural structures shall, when feasible, be located in the immediate vicinity of existing structures, described as the home- stead or curtilage, as.reasonable expansions of the homestead or curtilage or on the area(s) of the property of least productive capability. Such permitted structures shall, when feasible, utilize existing or common driveways, lanes or right of ways. C. The extraction of minerals by surface mining and extraction and removal of topsoil from the property are prohibited. The extraction of subsurface or deep -mined minerals, including natural gas and oil, and the non- commercial extraction of minerals including limestone, shale and other minerals shall be permitted, as long as the removal activity does not significantly diminish the agricultural potential of the land. D. Use of the property for dumping, storage, processing or landfill of non - agricultural solid waste generated off -site is prohibited. E. Use of the property for dumping, storage, processing, or landfill of hazardous or nuclear waste is prohibited. F. Signs, billboard, and outdoor advertising structures may not be displayed on the property except to state the name of the property, the name and address of the occupant, to advertise an on -site activity permitted herein and to advertise the property for sale or rent. G. Agricultural land will be managed in accordance with sound soil and water conservation practices in a manner which will not destroy or substantially or irretrievably diminish the productive capability of the . property. 14 H. County officials shall have the right to enforce these restrictions by injunction and all other appropriate proceedings allowable by law. Representatives of the county may enter upon the property for the purposes of inspection concerning compliance with the Farmland Preservation Program. I. The county will hold the development rights in public trust for farmland preservation purposes and will not voluntarily assign these rights except to another organization bound to hold such rights for the same purposes. J. All tracts of land from which development rights were purchased with Federal or State funds will be subject to Federal and State regulations concerning farmland preservation. 15 63 VIII. Farmland Ranking System 64 The Farmland Ranking System will be used to rank, or prioritize, applications received from landowners seeking sale or donation of their development rights. The system can also be used for evaluating conversion impact. The system consists of two parts: 1. Site Assessment Criteria: This part of the system consists of 10 factors, most of which are related to development pressures and development capability /suitability of a particular farm parcel and its surrounding area. Each factor is assigned a point value based on its relative importance to other factors. 2.- Soil Assessment Criteria: All soils in Forsyth County have been rated and placed into groups ranging from the most productive farmland to the least productive. A relative value. has been determined for each group — the best group is assigned the highest value and all other groups are assigned lower values. To determine the total value of a given parcel, the values for the Soil Assessment and Site Assessment criteria are added together. Site Assessment Criteria The following information describes the criteria to be used in site evaluation in administering the Farmland Preservation Program. Point values and the criteria for allocation of ranking points are listed below. 1. Farm Size (weight - 100 Points) A score of one point per acre is given up to a maximum of 100 points. 2. Percentage of Farm in Agricultural Use (weight - 100 points) A score of one ranking point per percentage point of land in production compared to total farm size is given up to maximum of 100 points. 16 65 3. Proximity to Public Water and Sewer (weight - 100 points) Existing service area adjacent- 100 points Existing service area within `/4 mile 80 points Planned service area within `/4 mile 70 points Existing service area within `/2 mile 60 points Planned service area within'` /2 mile 50 points Existing or planned service area within 1 mile radius 30 points No existing or planned service area within 1 mile radius 10 points 4. Probability of Conversion (weight - 100 points) Property subject to potential forced sale 100 points Property subject to estate settlement sale 75 points Property actively marketed for voluntary sale 50 points -5. Proximity to Planned Development (weight - 50 points) Non - Agricultural development planned adjacent 50 points Non - Agricultural development planned within %4 mile 40 points Non - Agricultural development planned within' /2 mile 30 points Non - Agricultural development planned within 1 mile 20 points Planned agriculture within 1 mile 10 points 6. Proximity to Agricultural Priority Areas (APA) (weight - 50 points) Included in or adjacent to APA 50 points Within `/4 mile 40 points %4 to %2 mile 30 points More than %2 mile 20 points 7. Capital Investment in Farm Operation (weight - 200 Points) (Dwellings are not included in this determination other than employee housing.) Substantial capital investment within past 5 years 200 points Substantial capital investment within past 10 year 100 points Substantial capital investment within past 15 years 50 points 8. Conservation Program (weight - 200 points) A score of two ranking points per percentage point of land meeting the "r' formula of conservation is given up to a maximum of 200 points. 17 9. Historic, Scenic, Environmental Qualities (weight - 50 points) Exceptional features favorable to preservation (National Register of Historic Places, exception scenic contribution on major highway corridor, exceptional or special environmental circumstances) 50 points Significant features favorable to preservation (Historic Site Survey, significant scenic contribution of rural roads, significant environmental circumstances.) 40 points Features favorable to preservation (Significant, but undocumented historic features, moderate localized scenic contribution and/or limited but recognized environmental features favorable to preservation) 30 points 10. Specialty Products (weight - 50 points) A score of one -half a ranking point per percentage point of land used for production of a locally unique crop or product up to a maximum of 50 points. 50 points 18 66 67 Soil Assessment Criteria The following tables list the soil types found in Forsyth County with the pertinent characteristics, groupings, relative values and ranking system points. This information is used to determine the relative soil quality of a given parcel of land by the administration of the Farmland Preservation Program. Land Ranking Map Soil Cap Farmland Agricultural Relative System Svmbol Series Slope Subclass Class Group Value Points A1B Altavista 1 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 ApB Appling 2 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 CcB Cecil 2 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 HiB Hiwassee 2 -6 2E Prime 1 1.0 700 MaB Madison 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 MeB _ Mecklenburg 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 PaB Pacolet 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 WdB Wedowee 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 WkB Wickham 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 VaB Vance 2 -6 2E Prime 2 .86 602 ApC Appling 6 -10 3E Prime 2 .86 602 WkC Wickham 6 -10 3E Prime 2 .86 602 HmB2 Hiwassee 2 -6 3E Prime 2 .86 602 EnB Enon 2 -6 2E State & Local 3 .76 532 CeB2 Cecil 2 -6 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 CcC Cecil 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 HiC Hiwassee 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 MaC Madison 6 -10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 MeC Mecklenburg 6-10 3E State & Local 3 .76 532 Co Congaree 0 -2 2W State & Local 4 .72 504 Ch Chewacla 0 -2 3W State & Local 4 .72 504 Wh Wehadkee 0 -2 4W State & Local 4 .72 504 PcB2 Pacolet 2 -6 3E State & Local 5 .64 448 McB2 Madison 2-6 3E State & Local 5 .64 448 PaC Pacolet 6 -10 3E State & Local 5 .64 448 CeC2 Cecil 6 -10 4E State & Local 5 .64 448 HmC2 Hiwassee 6 -10 4E State & Local 5 .64 448 McC2 Madison 6 -10 4E State & Local 5 .64 448 19 P 68 Land Ranking Map Soil Cap Farmland Agricultural Relative System Svmbol Series Slope Subclass Class Group Value Points IrB Iredell 2 -6 2E Other 6 .61 427 WeB Wedowee - 2 -6 3E Other 6 .61 427 Louisburg EnC Enon 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 WeC Wedowee- 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 Louisburg WdC Wedowee 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 VaC Vance 6 -10 3E Other 6 .61 427 CcD Cecil 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 HiD Hiwassee 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 MaD Madison 10 -15. 4E Other 7 .53 371 MeD Mecklenburg 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 PaD Pacolet 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 WdD Wedowee 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 WkD Wickham 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 HmD2 Hiwassee 10 -15 4E Other 7 .53 371 WiC Wilkes 6 -10 4E Other 8 .43 301 PcC2 Pacolet 6 -10 4E Other 8 .43 301 EnD Enon 10 -15 4E Other 8 .43 301 VaD Vance 10 -15 4E Other 8 .43 301 WeD Wedowee 10 -15 4E Other 8 .43 301 Louisburg PcC3 Pacolet 6 -10 6E Other 9 .23 161 LoD Louisburg 6 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 TaD Tallapoosa 6 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 WiD Wilkes 10 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 McD2 Madison 10 -15 6E Other 9 .23 161 PcD2 Pacolet 10 -15 6E Other. 9 .23 161 HiE Hiwassee 15 -25 6E Other 9 .23 161 LwE Louisburg- 15 -25 6E Other 9 .23 161 Wedowee MaF Madison 15-45 6E Other 9 .23 161 PaF Pacolet 15-45 6E Other 9 .23 161 P 68 69 21 n Land Ranking Map Soil Cap _ Farmland Agricultural Relative System Svmbol Series Slone Subclass Class Group Value Points PeE3 Pacolet 10 -25 7E Other 10 .09 63 LoF Louisburg 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 TaF Tallapoosa 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 WiF Wilkes 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 PcF Pacolet 15-45 7E Other 10 .09 63 Cu Cut & Fill Land -- -- Other 11 0 0 Gu Gulhed Land -- -- Other 11 0 0 PuC Pacolet - Urban 2 -10 — Other 11 0 0 Land PuE Pacolet - Urban 10 -25 -- Other 11 0 0 Land 21 n f 11 a MEMORANDUM TO: John Link, County Manager FROM: Don Belk, Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Historical Perspective on the Work of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board DATE: May 8, 1998 COPIES: Rod Visser, Assistant County Manager Gene Bell, Acting Planning Director 70 As you know, Commissioner Crowther has proposed an allocation of $200,000 in the Capital Investment Plan (CIP) for a PACE program. This proposal was based on one of the Farmland Preservation goals presented by the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board (ADAB) on February 10, 1998. Mr. Crowther's proposal is the culmination of the ADAB's efforts during the 1990's to establish a voluntary farmland preservation program for Orange County. Establishing such a program was the original charge given the ADAB by the Board of Commissioners. Following is a historical perspective of the work of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board. Activities of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board, 1990 -1993 In August 1990, the Board of Commissioners reconstituted the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board and charged it with developing a purchase of development rights (PDR) program for Orange County. One month later, the Advisory Board initiated its work, and, in June of 1991, presented a status report to the Board of Commissioners on the proposal. The Board of Commissioners asked the Advisory Board to address the following: • Revision of the system of ranking farmland to include visibility from major thoroughfares and proximity to municipalities; • Expansion of the Advisory Board to include municipal representation, including preparation of a Farmland Preservation Ordinance; and • Presentation of the PDR proposal to Township Advisory Councils to develop support for the program proposals. Between June 1991 and February 1993, the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board addressed these concerns identified by the Board of Commissioners. A Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance was adopted, ADAB membership was expanded to include municipal representation, and Rules of Procedure were adopted. In April 1992, 1,300 notices were sent to land owners participating in the Present Use Value Taxation Program, advising them of the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program. In June of that year, Orange County's first Voluntary Agricultural District was designated by the Board of Commissioners. 71 Historical Perspective on the Work of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board May 8, 1998 Page Two The Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance was amended in September 1992 to reduce the amount of farm acreage required for participation. In February 1993, the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program Ordinance was amended to permit small tracts surrounded by or adjacent to existing or proposed districts to be included. Purchase of Development Rights/Farmland Preservation Bond: 1993 -1994 PDR Program guidelines were developed during 1993 -1994 by the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board and the Planning Staff. During preparations for 1994 Farmland Bond, the ADAB and staff assembled a technical manual for the evaluation and assessment of farmland. Known as "the Green Book ", this document contains the detailed methodology for the evaluation and ranking of farmland applying for the PDR program. Applications would be evaluated and ranked using the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) system developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. LESA ranks farmland according to several factors. First, it is evaluated for its agricultural significance. Such factors as cropland and forest land productivity, as well as farm characteristics such as size, percentage of site in farm use, conservation plan implementation, adjacent land uses, and distance to urban area are assessed. Secondly, a farm is evaluated for natural /cultural significance, where the presence of natural areas and wildlife corridors, wetlands, scenic vistas, and historic sites is assessed. These factors are totaled, and rankings are based on the overall significance of, each farm that applies to and evaluated for the PDR program. The LESA system has been used extenively nationwide. Forsyth County, North Carolina is notable among the jurisdictions that have used LESA. For farmland ranking highest under this evaluation system, an independent appraisal would be conducted to determine its development value. The farmland owner, upon receiving results of the appraisal, would present an offer to the County for the sale of `development rights'. If the offer is acceptable to the County, a purchase agreement is authorized. At closing, a conservation easement restricting the future non - agricultural development of the land is executed. These procedures are detailed in Section 3 of the Green Book. In May 1994, the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board met with Board of Commissioners to review work completed to date on the LESA system, and administrative procedures and financial options for a PDR program. Subsequently, the Board of Commissioners adopted a bond calendar and proceeded with plans to hold a referendum on a $5.0 million farmland preservation program. In November 1994, the bond issue was defeated by a margin of 52% to 48 %. Activities of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board 1994 - Present Since the November 1994 bond referendum, the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board has focused on a more comprehensive approach to farmland preservation, with an emphasis -on public education and voluntary landowner initiatives. I a1 72 Historical Perspective on the Work of the Agricultural Districts Advisory Board May 8, 1998 Page Three In October 1995, the ADAB conducted a Farmland Preservation Workshop. Representatives from the American Farmland Trust and the Lancaster County (PA) Farmland Protection Board were invited to meet . with the farm community and general population to identify successful methods of farmland preservation. During the last quarter of 1995, the ADAB organized an Agriculture Subcommittee. They produced a segment on agriculture for the update of the Strategic Plan for Economic Development in Orange County, prepared by the Orange County Economic Development Commission. In early 1996, ADAB held a series of staff training workshops involving Planning, Soil Conservation, and Agricultural Extension personnel in the use of voluntary conservation easements as a means of farmland preservation through estate planning. Also during this time, two public forums entitled Keeping Your Land in Family Hands were presented for the benefit of rural landowners. Over 150 persons attended the sessions. Several attendees indicated this was their first exposure to the idea of conservation easements. One participant, Jean Earnhardt, eventually donated a 120 -acre easement to the Triangle Land Conservancy as a result of the information she received at the forum. During late 1995 -early 1996, the ADAB closely studied a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Study prepared by a Planning Intern as part of program. requirements for a Masters Degree in City & Regional Planning. They considered a number of scenarios for a market - driven TDR system that would be equitable for rural landholders. During the Spring and Summer of 1996, the ADAB scrutinized its Purchase of Development Rights Program (the "Green Book ") including the LESA system for evaluating farmland and evaluating alternative revenue sources. The Board reviewed a number of successful farmland preservation programs in other parts of the country, including Lancaster County, PA and Montgomery County, MD. To reflect their forward - thinking approach to farmland preservation, they adopted the acronym PACE, for Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements. A potential revenue source for a PACE program was considered: money received from payment of deferred property taxes when land is removed from the use -value program. It was determined that the County has received on average, since 1991, $200,000 annually from deferred tax payments. The ADAB first proposed this idea to the Board of Commissioners in late 1996, in their goals statement for the 1997- 1998 fiscal year. During 1997, the ADAB developed a survey of agricultural status and trends, which was distributed to the farming community in early 1998. Results of the survey will be released later this month. The Board also considered the feasibility of establishing an Orange County land trust as well as a Preservation Division within the Planning Department. In their proposed goals for 1998 -99, presented to the Board of Commissioners on February 14; the ADAB again proposed funding for the PACE program. They also repeated their call for establishing a transfer of development rights program. The ADAB also proposed a number of revisions to the Voluntary Farmland Preservation Program to create more incentives for farmers to 'participate, including additional tax breaks for preserving farmland. /[•i7